11  B  RAR.Y 

OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY 
OF    ILLINOIS 

9773 

CS4g 
cop.o 


PRIZE  ESSAYS 

OP  THK 

AMERICAN  HISTORICAL  ASSOCIATION 
1908 


To  this  Essay  was  awarded  the 

JUSTIN  WINSOR  PRIZE  IN 

AMERICAN  HISTORY 

for  1908 


GREAT  BRITAIN 


AND 


1763-1774 


BY 

CLARENCE  EDWIN  CARTER,  A.  M.,  Ph.D.. 

ASSISTANT    PROFtSSOR   OF  HISTORY   IN   ILLINOIS   COLLEGE,  SOMETIME   FELLOW   IN 
HISTORY   IN  THE   UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


PUBLISHED   BY 

THE  AMERICAN  HISTORICAL  ASSOCIATION 

WASHINGTON,  1910 


COPYRIGHT,  igio 

BY  THE  AMERICAN  HISTORICAL  ASSOCIATION 
WASHINGTON,  D.  C. 


TO 
MY  FATHER  AND  MOTHER 


PREFACE. 

IN  the  present  study  my  researches  have  been  directed 
toward  the  discovery  of  the  legal,  political,  and  economic 
relations  between  Great  Britain  and  the  Illinois  colony,  and 
the  political  events  in  Illinois  which  illustrate  some  of  those 
general  relations.  In  addition  to  the  Illinois  settlement, 
the  great  West  which  was  ceded  to  England  in  1763  in- 
cluded other  colonies  of  comparatively  equal  importance, 
the  chief  of  which  was  Detroit.  Whatever  general  prin- 
ciples, therefore,  are  ascertained  with  reference  to  the 
relations  between  the  home  government  and  the  Illinois 
French  apply  equally  to  the  whole  West.  In  the  discussion 
of  the  illustrative  events,  however,  I  have  followed  their 
course  in  Illinois  alone. 

In  chapters  I  and  III,  both  of  which  are  in  a  sense 
introductory,  no  serious  attempt  has  been  made  at  original 
investigation.  On  certain  points,  however,  I  have  sought 
to  verify  secondary  authorities  and  harmonize  conflicting 
statements  by  an  examination  of  the  sources.  Chapter  II 
deals  with  the  legal  position  of  the  western  settlements  in 
the  empire.  Chapters  IV  and  VII  contain  a  narrative  of 
events  in  Illinois  from  1765  to  1774,  gleaned  entirely  from 
hitherto  unused  manuscript  material.  The  question  of  the 
economic  importance  of  the  West  to  the  empire  is  dis- 
cussed in  chapter  V.  The  various  attempts  to  colonize  the 
Illinois  country  by  English  settlers  and  the  attitude  of 
Great  Britain  toward  such  enterprises  in  general  occupy 
chapter  VI.  This  subject  has  been  handled  by  previous 
writers,  but  considerable  new  material  has  been  found  which 
throws  light  on  the  colonizing  movement,  enabling  one  to 
disentangle  the  various  plans. 

(vii) 


viii  PREFACE 

The  printed  sources  of  value  covering  the  period  are 
few.  Such  collections,  however,  as  the  Documents  relat- 
ing to  the  Colonial  History  of  the  State  of  New  York,  the 
various  editions  of  the  works  of  Benjamin  Franklin,  and  the 
Reports  on  Canadian  Archives  have  been  invaluable. 
The  essay  as  a  whole  has  been  based ,  however ,  upon  manu- 
script sources  found  in  the  various  archives  of  the  United 
States,  Canada,  and  Europe.  A  personal  search  was  made 
not  only  in  the  local  archives  of  the  State  of  Illinois,  but  in 
the  libraries  of  the  middle  western  and  eastern  States,  as 
well  as  in  the  Public  Record  Office  and  the  British  Museum 
in  London.  In  the  last  named  places  the  bulk  of  the 
material  was  found. 

I  desire  to  express  my  gratitude  for  aid  and  encourage- 
ment to  Professor  Evarts  B.  Greene,  in  whose  seminar  in 
history  at  the  University  of  Illinois  this  essay  was  begun, 
and  especially  to  Professor  Clarence  W.  Alvord  of  the 
University  of  Illinois,  whose  intimate  knowledge  of  the 
field  has  been  of  material  assistance  throughout  my  study. 
I  also  wish  to  express  my  thanks  for  helpful  criticisms  of 
the  manuscript  to  Professor  Guy  Stanton  Ford  of  the 
University  of  Illinois,  to  President  C.  H.  Rammelkamp 
and  to  Professor  J.  Griffith  Ames  of  Illinois  College,  and 
to  Professor  Charles  H.  Hull  of  Cornell  University,  chair- 
man of  the  Justin  Winsor  Prize  committee.  I  owe  an 
especial  debt  of  gratitude  to  my  wife  and  faithful  amanuen- 
sis, without  whose  encouragement  the  essay  would  not  have 
been  completed  in  its  present  form. 

CLARENCE  E.  CARTER. 

JACKSONVILLE,  ILLINOIS,  August  20,  1909. 


CONTENTS. 


PAGE 

PREFACE vii 

CHAPTER  I. 
Introductory  Survey    ......  i 

CHAPTER  II. 
Status  of  the  Illinois  Country  in  the  Empire       .         -13 

CHAPTER  III. 

Occupation  of  the  Illinois  Country        .         .         .          27 

CHAPTER  IV. 

Five  Years  of  Disorder,  1765-1770  .         .         .         .46 

CHAPTER  V. 
Trade  Conditions  in  the  Illinois  Country,  1765-1775     77 

CHAPTER  VI. 

Schemes  for  the  Colonization  of  the  Illinois  Country, 
1763-1768         .         .  ....   103 

CHAPTER  VII. 
The  Struggle  for  a  Civil  Government,  1770-1774  .        145 

DOCUMENTARY  APPENDIX           .         .         .         .         .165 
BIBLIOGRAPHY 185 

INDEX 201 

(ix) 


CHAPTER  I. 

INTRODUCTORY  SURVEY. 

As  a  result  of  the  treaty  of  Paris  (1763)  which  added 
to  the  empire  immense  areas  of  territory  peopled  with 
savages  and  alien  inhabitants ,  Great  Britain  was  confronted 
with  the  momentous  problem  of  readjusting  all  her  colonial 
relations.  At  this  time  the  necessity  of  strengthening  the 
imperial  ties  between  the  old  colonies  and  the  mother 
country  and  of  reorganizing  the  new  acquisitions  came  to 
the  forefront  and  led  the  government  into  a  course  soon  to 
end  in  the  disruption  of  the  empire.  Certainly  not  the 
least  of  the  questions  demanding  solution  was  the  disposi- 
tion of  the  country  lying  to  the  westward  of  the  colonies, 
including  a  number  of  French  settlements  and  a  broad 
belt  of  Indian  nations. 

The  conclusion  of  the  Seven  Years'  war  saw  a  tremen- 
dous change  in  the  relative  position  of  France  and  Eng- 
land in  North  America  :  the  former  had  lost  and  the  latter 
gained  an  empire.  The  final  struggle  for  supremacy  was 
the  culmination  of  a  series  of  continental  and  colonial  wars 
beginning  near  the  close  of  the  seventeenth  century  and 
ending  with  the  definitive  treaty  of  1763.  During  the 
first  quarter  of  the  century  France  occupied  a  predominant 
position  among  the  powers.  Through  the  aggressiveness 
of  Louis  XIV  and  his  ministers  her  boundaries  had  been 
pushed  eastward  and  northward,  thereby  seriously  threaten- 
ing the  balance  of  power  in  Europe.  Until  1748  England 


2  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

and  Austria  had  been  in  alliance  against  their  traditional 
enemy,  and  in  the  war  of  the  Austrian  Succession  France 
had  lent  her  aid  to  Prussia  in  the  dismemberment  of  the 
Austrian  dominions — at  the  same  time  extending  her  own 
power  in  the  interior  of  America  and  India.  These  inter- 
national struggles,  however,  brought  no  definite  results  : 
territorial  boundaries  had  not  been  adjusted  nor  had  the 
balance  of  power  been  satisfactorily  settled.  The  growth 
of  the  power  of  Prussia  under  the  leadership  of  Frederick 
the  Great  now  became  a  most  important  factor.  The 
aggressions  of  France  soon  ran  counter  to  the  course  of  the 
new  national  state  and  another  conflict  was  inevitable.  In 
the  interval  of  nominal  peace  after  the  treaty  of  Aix-la- 
Chapelle  in  1748,  preparations  were  begun  for  another 
contest.  The  astute  diplomacy  of  Kaunitz  won  France 
from  her  traditional  enmity  and  secured  that  power  as  an 
open  ally  for  Maria  Theresa  in  her  war  of  revenge.1 

While  the  European  situation  was  giving  occasion  for 
new  alignments  of  the  powers,  affairs  in  America  were  be- 
coming more  and  more  critical  between  France  and  Eng- 
land. Here  for  over  a  century  the  two  powers  had  been 
rivals  for  territorial  and  commercial  supremacy.  In  North 
America  the  pioneers  of  France  had  won  for  her  the  greater 
part  of  the  continent,  the  extensive  valleys  of  the  St. 
Lawrence  and  the  Mississippi  with  all  the  land  watered  by 
their  tributaries.  The  French  claim  to  this  region  was 
based  almost  entirely  upon  discovery  and  exploration,  for 
in  all  its  extent  less  than  one  hundred  thousand  people 
were  permanently  settled.  Canada  at  the  north  and  the 
region  about  New  Orleans  on  the  extreme  south  contained 
the  bulk  of  the  population,  while  throughout  the  old  North- 
west settlements  were  few  and  scattering.  Trading  posts 

1  Perkins,  France  under  Louis  XV,  II,  1-83. 


INTRODUCTOR  Y  SUR  VE  Y  3 

and  small  villages  existed  at  Vincennes  on  the  Wabash 
River,  at  Detroit,  at  St.  Joseph  near  Lake  Michigan,  and 
at  other  isolated  places.  Outside  of  Detroit  the  most  im- 
portant and  populous  settlement  was  situated  along  the 
eastern  bank  of  the  Mississippi,  in  the  southwestern  part  of 
the  present  State  of  Illinois,  where  about  two  thousand 
people  were  living.2 

In  contrast  to  this  vast  area  of  French  territory  and  the 
sparseness  of  its  population  were  the  British  colonies,  with 
more  than  a  million  people  confined  to  the  narrow  strip 
between  the  Alleghany  mountains  and  the  Atlantic  Ocean. 
These  provinces  were  becoming  comparatively  crowded, 
and  many  enterprising  families  of  English,  Scotch-Irish, 
and  German  extraction  were  pushing  towards  the  moun- 
tains. Each  year  saw  the  pressure  on  the  western  border 
increased.  The  great  unoccupied  valley  of  the  Ohio  in- 
vited home- seekers  and  adventurers  westward  in  spite  of 
hostile  French  and  Indians.  By  1750  the  mountain  bar- 
riers were  being  crossed  by  constantly  increasing  numbers, 
and  the  French  found  their  possession  of  the  West  and 
their  monopoly  of  the  fur  trade  threatened. 

To  prevent  such  encroachments  the  French  sought  to 
bind  their  possessions  together  by  means  of  a  line  of  forts 
extending  from  the  St.  Lawrence  down  the  Ohio  Valley  to 
the  Gulf  of  Mexico.  It  had  indeed  been  the  plan  of  such 
men  as  La  Salle,  Iberville,  and  Bienville  to  bring  this  terri- 
tory into  a  compact  whole  and  to  limit  the  English  col- 
onies to  the  line  of  mountains.  New  Orleans  and  Mobile 
gave  France  command  of  the  Gulf  of  Mexico  and  the 
Mississippi  River;  Louisburg,  Niagara,  and  Frontenac 

*  Hutchins,  A  Topographical  Description,  ed.  Hicks,  i66ff;  Pitt- 
man,  The  Present  State  of  the  European  Settlements  on  the  Mis- 
sissippi, ed.  Hodder,  84ff. 


4  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

afforded  protection  to  Canada  against  the  English  colonies. 
The  weak  point  for  France  was  the  Ohio  Valley,  in  the 
upper  part  of  which  Virginia  and  Pennsylvania  settlers  had 
already  located  by  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  century. 
Celeron,  who  went  down  the  Ohio  in  1749,  burying  plates 
of  lead  to  signify  French  dominion,  warning  English  set- 
tlers and  traders,  and  persuading  the  Indians  to  drive  out 
the  invaders  of  their  hunting  grounds,  saw  the  inevitable- 
ness  of  the  conflict.  The  American  phase  of  the  final 
struggle  for  colonial  empire  was  to  begin  in  this  region.3 

In  the  early  years  of  the  French  and  Indian  war,  the 
American  counterpart  of  the  Seven  Years'  war,  Great 
Britain  and  her  Prussian  ally  met  with  serious  reverses 
everywhere,  and  it  seemed  probable  that  France  would  be 
able  to  hold  her  line  of  defence  in  America.  The  French 
colonies,  however,  were  fundamentally  weak.  They  were 
wholly  dependent  upon  the  mother  country,  and  when  the 
latter  became  absorbed  in  the  continental  struggle  to  the 
exclusion  of  her  interests  in  the  colonies  defeat  was  in- 
evitable. By  1758  the  tide  was  turning  in  America;  this, 
together  with  the  victories  of  Clive  in  India  and  Frederick 
the  Great  at  Rossbach  and  Leuthen,  proved  too  much  for 
the  resources  of  France,  and  with  the  transference  of  the 
American  struggle  to  Canada,  and  the  capture  of  Montreal 
and  Quebec,  the  war  was  practically  at  an  end.  In  1762 
the  financial  condition  of  France  became  so  desperate  that 
Choiseul,  the  French  minister  of  foreign  affairs,  was  anxious 
for  peace,  and  he  found  George  III  and  Lord  Bute,  Eng- 
land's prime  minister,  ready  to  abandon  their  Prussian  ally, 
and  even  to  give  up  the  fruits  of  some  of  the  brilliant  vic- 
tories of  1762  which  had  brought  Spain,  a  recent  ally  of 
France,  to  her  knees.4 

8  Parkman,  Montcalm  and  Wolfe^  I,  39-67. 
4  Hunt,  Pol.  Hist,  of  Eng.>  X,  23-40. 


INTRODUCTOK  Y  SUR  VE Y  5 

The  definitive  treaty  of  Paris  was  signed  February  10, 
iy63.5  By  its  terms  France  ceded  to  Great  Britain  all  of 
Canada  and  gave  up  her  claim  to  the  territory  east  of  the 
Mississippi  River,  except  the  city  of  New  Orleans,  adding 
to  this  the  right  of  the  free  navigation  of  the  Mississippi. 
Spain  received  back  Havana,  ceding  Florida  to  England  in 
return.  A  few  weeks  before  signing  the  definitive  treaty, 
France,  in  a  secret  treaty  with  Spain,  ceded  to  her  the  city 
of  New  Orleans  and  the  vast  region  stretching  from  the 
Mississippi  towards  the  Pacific.  Thus  was  France  divested 
of  every  inch  of  territory  on  the  continent  of  North  America. 

The  French  colony  in  the  Illinois  country  had  been 
originally  established  to  form  a  connecting  link  between 
the  colonies  in  Louisiana  on  the  south  and  Canada  on  the 
northwest.  La  Salle  himself  had  recognized  the  possible 
strategic  value  of  such  an  establishment  from  both  a  com- 
mercial and  a  military  standpoint.6  Even  before  any 
settlements  had  been  made  on  the  lower  Mississippi,  in 
1682  he  and  his  associates  had  attempted  the  formation  of 
a  colony  on  the  Illinois  River,  near  the  present  site  of 
Peoria.6  This,  the  first  attempt  at  western  colonization, 
was  a  failure.  The  opening  of  the  following  century  saw 
the  beginning  of  a  more  successful  and  permanent  colony, 
when  the  Catholic  missionaries  from  Quebec  established 
their  missions  at  Cahokia7  and  Kaskaskia,  near  the  village 
of  the  Illinois  Indians.  They  were  soon  followed  by 
hunters  and  fur  traders,  and  during  the  first  two  decades  of 
the  eighteenth  century  a  considerable  number  of  families 

5  Text  of  treaty  in  Chalmers,  Coll.  of  Treaties,  1,467-483;  Docu- 
ments relating  to  the  Constitutional  History  of  Canada,  I'j^g-ijgi,  ed. 
Shortt  and  Doughty  (Can.  Archives,  1907),  73-84. 

6Parkman,  La  Salle  and  the  Discovery  of  the  Great  West,  312. 

7  Cahokia  was  founded  in  1699  by  the  priests  of  the  Seminary  of 
Foreign  Missions. 


6  'I HE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

immigrated  from  Canada,  thus  assuring  the  permanency  of 
the  settlement. 

Meanwhile  the  contemporaneous  colony  of  Louisiana  had 
grown  to  some  importance ,  and  in  1717,  when  the  Com- 
pany of  the  West  assumed  control  of  the  province,  the  Illi- 
nois country  was  annexed  to  Louisiana.8  Prior  to  this 
time  it  had  been  within  the  jurisdiction  of  Quebec.  The 
Illinois  country  now  entered  upon  a  period  of  prosperity, 
many  new  enterprises  being  undertaken,  notably  the  open- 
ing of  lead  mines.  Shortly  after  its  annexation  to  Louisi- 
ana, Pierre  Boisbriant  was  given  a  commission  to  govern 
the  Illinois  country,  and  among  his  instructions  was  an 
order  to  erect  a  fort  as  a  protection  against  possible  en- 
croachments from  the  English  and  Spanish.  About  1720 
Fort  de  Chartres  was  completed  and  became  thereafter  the 
seat  of  government  during  the  French  regime.  In  1721 
the  Company  of  the  Indies 9  divided  Louisiana  into  nine  dis- 
tricts, one  of  which  was  known  as  the  Illinois  district,10  ex- 
tending east  and  west  of  the  Mississippi  River  between  the 
lines  of  the  Arkansas  and  Illinois  rivers."  In  1731  Louisi- 
ana passed  out  of  the  hands  of  the  Company  of  the 
Indies,  and,  together  with  its  Illinois  dependency,  became 

8  Archives  of  the  Ministry  of  the  Colonies  (Paris),  series  A,  vol.  22, 
fol.  40. 

9  In  May,  1719,  the  Company  of  the  East  Indies  and  the  Company 
of  China  were  assimilated  to  the  Company  of  the  West,  the  name  of 
which  was  changed  to  Company  of  the  Indies.     Margry,  Decouvertes, 
V,  590. 

10  Winsor,  Narr.  and  Crit.  Hist.  ofAm.,V,  43. 

11  "  Regulations  for  the  government  of  the  district  ",  Archives  of  the 
Ministry  of  the  Colonies,  series  B,  vol.  43,  fol.  103;   Winsor,  Narr. 
and  Crit.  Hist,  of  Am.,  V,  43.     The  boundary  between  Canada  and 
Louisiana  during  the  French  regime  was  approximately  the  4Oth  par- 
allel.    This  left  the  French  settlement  at  Ouiatanon  to  the  Quebec 
government  while  Post  Vincennes  on  the  lower  Wabash  River  was  in 
Louisiana.     Pownall,  Administration  of  the  Colonies,  192. 


INTRODUCTORY  SURVEY  7 

a  royal  province.12  It  remained  in  this  status  until  the 
close  of  the  Seven  Years'  war,  when  that  portion  east  of 
the  Mississippi  was  ceded  to  England  as  a  part  of  Canada.13 

At  the  close  of  the  French  regime  a  number  of  villages 
scattered  along  the  Mississippi  River  from  near  the  mouth 
of  the  Kaskaskia  northward  seventy-five  miles  to  Cahokia 
contained  the  population  of  the  country.  Kaskaskia  at 
the  extreme  south  was  the  largest  town  of  the  group,  with 
eighty  houses,  five  hundred  whites,  and  about  an  equal 
number  of  negroes.  Some  seventeen  miles  north  was 
Prairie  du  Rocher  with  a  population  of  one  hundred 
French  and  as  many  slaves.  A  short  distance  northwest 
of  Prairie  du  Rocher,  on  the  bank  of  the  Mississippi,  stood 
Fort  de  Chartres,  surrounded  by  a  little  village  called 
Nouvelle  Chartres,  where  some  forty  families  were  settled. 
St.  Philippe,  five  miles  north  of  Fort  de  Chartres,  con- 
tained twelve  or  fifteen  families,  and  forty-five  miles  further 
north  stood  Cahokia  with  three  hundred  whites  and  eighty 
negroes.14 

Most  of  the  French  people  of  Illinois  came  originally 
from  Canada 15  although  a  few  immigrated  from  France 16  and 
others  were  sent  there  from  Louisiana  by  the  Company  of 

12  Winsor,  Narr.  and  Crit.  Hist,  of  Am. ,  V,  49. 

18  Treaty  of  Paris,  section  VII,  Can.  Const.  Docs. ,  7759-7797,  86. 

u  Pittman,  State  of  the  European  Settlements  on  the  Miss. ,  ed. 
Hodder,  84-93.  There  is  no  detailed  and  satisfactory  account  of  the 
French  regime  in  print,  with  reference  either  to  its  political,  social,  or 
economic  aspects.  The  works  of  Breese,  Wallace,  Brown,  Mason,  and 
others  are  entirely  unscientific  and  unreliable.  The  recent  discovery 
of  a  large  number  of  papers  bearing  on  the  period  will  enable  future 
scholars  to  reach  more  accurate  conclusions.  For  a  recent  brief  but 
judicious  survey  of  the  French,  based  largely  on  a  study  of  document- 
ary material,  see  Alvord,  Illinois  Historical  Collections,  II,  xviii— xxv. 

15  Du  Pratz,  Histoire  de  la  Loutstane,  II,  296. 

16 Ibid.,  I,  230-231. 


8  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

the  Indies.17  There  existed  among  them  two  classes,  the 
"  gentry  "  and  the  habitant,  the  latter  being  greatly  in  the 
majority.  The  habitants  had  belonged  to  the  lower  classes 
in  Canada  and  possessed  few  of  the  social  and  intellectual 
attainments  which  marked  their  superiors.  Occupied 
chiefly  in  the  collection  of  furs  or  in  the  humbler  duties  of 
commerce,  they  came  into  close  contact  with  the  Indians, 
in  whose  company  much  of  their  time  was  spent.  They 
not  only  associated  with  the  Indians  but  many  even  married 
Indian  girls.'8  Outside  of  the  gains  made  in  the  peltry 
trade  or  their  wages  as  boatmen  their  lives  were  not  pro- 
ductive, and  their  scanty  earnings  were  spent  immediately 
upon  returning  to  the  villages.  They  cared  nothing  for 
agriculture  and  other  settled  pursuits,  exhibiting  in  all  their 
activities  a  total  lack  of  initiative  and  of  capacity  to  adapt 
themselves  to  settled  life.18  But  the  faults  of  the  habitants, 
conspicuous  though  they  were,  differed  much  from  those  of 
the  American  frontiersmen.  The  frontiersmen  had  no 
respect  for  law  and  authority,  while  the  habitants  in  gen- 
eral preferred  to  be  guided  by  law  in  all  their  dealings.20 
Petty  quarrels  were  frequent,  but  instead  of  ending  them 
in  a  fight,  recourse  was  invariably  had  to  the  courts.  In 
their  business  transactions  the  assistance  of  judge  or  notary 
was  always  sought.20 

On  the  other  hand  the  "  gentry  ",  comprising  the  larger 
merchants  and  farmers,  came  from  the  better  classes  in 
Canada  and  France.  They  surrounded  themselves  with  all 
the  luxuries  that  could  be  brought  from  Canada  or  Europe. 
Some  were  able  to  claim  nobility  of  birth  ,'a  and  many  were 

17  Bossu,  Travels,  126. 

18  Ibid.;  Du  Pratz,  Histoire  de  la  Louisiane,  II,  297. 
19Volney,   View  of  the  United  States,  338ff. 

20  Alvord,  ///.  Hist.  Colls.,  II,  xviii. 

11  Ibia.,  xix;  see  also  Du  Pratz,  Histoire  at  la  Louisiane,  II,  297. 


INTRODUCTORY  SURVEY  9 

wealthy  and  influential.  Some  of  the  latter  possessed 
capital  before  immigrating  to  Illinois,  and  others  rose  to 
prominence  by  industry  and  shrewdness.  Among  the  more 
prominent  were  Jean  Baptiste  Barbau  of  Prairie  du  Rocher, 
the  Bauvais,  Charleville,  Viviat,  Lachance,  and  Cerr£  fam- 
ilies of  Kaskaskia,  and  the  Sauciers,  Francois  Trottier,  and 
J.  B.  H.  La  Croix  of  Cahokia.22 

The  government  of  the  French  was  neither  military  nor 
paternal.  Although  the  military  commandant  represented 
the  king  of  France,  he  did  not  have  all  power,  nor  were 
the  people  subjected  entirely  to  the  will  of  the  priest.23 
After  1717  the  Illinois  district  was  subordinate  to  the  gov- 
ernment of  Louisiana.  The  civil  government  of  the  dis- 
trict was  composed  of  a  commandant,  a  commissary,  a 
judge,  a  principal  scrivener  of  the  marine,  a  king's  attorney, 
a  keeper  of  the  royal  warehouse,  a  clerk  of  the  court, 
deputy  clerks,  syndics,  and  notaries.24  As  a  rule  a  number 
of  offices  were  united  :  the  positions  of  commissary,  judge, 
and  scrivener  were  held  by  the  same  person  ;  and  the  duties 
of  attorney  and  keeper  of  the  royal  warehouse  were  like- 
wise combined.  In  addition  to  the  officers  already  men- 
tioned ,  each  village  had  its  captain  of  militia  ,25  an  important 
local  executive  officer  appointed  by  the  colonial  authorities. 
His  specific  duties  were  to  prepare  the  muster-roll  of  the 
parish  and  to  enforce  the  decrees  of  the  intendant  of  the 
council.26  The  syndic  and  the  parish  priest  also  had  very 

"Alvord,  ///.  Hist,  Colls.,  II,  xix-xx. 

23  Both  views  have  hitherto  been  common  to  historians  of  the  period. 
Pittman  is  largely  responsible  for  the  view  that  the  people  were  subject 
to  the  caprice  of  the  military  commandant.  Other  writers  have  stated 
that  the  French  were  living  in  a  kind  of  Arcadian  simplicity,  with  no 
lawyers  or  litigation.  An  examination  of  the  documentary  material  of 
the  time  indicates  that  both  views  are  erroneous. 

"Alvord,  ///.  in  the  Eighteenth   Cent.,  8 

J5Breese,  Early  Hist,  of  III.,  216. 

MMunro,  The  Seigniorial  System  in  Canada,  43,  73. 


io  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

important  local  duties,  especially  with  reference  to  the 
execution  of  the  edicts  of  the  village  assemblies  and  the 
laws  of  the  commons.27  The  French  had  in  fact  brought 
with  them  the  organization  of  the  village  community  and 
the  system  of  land  tenure  which  they  had  known  in  France. 
Each  village  had  its  common  field  divided  into  long  narrow 
strips  which  the  inhabitants  cultivated ,  and  the  common ,  or 
pasture  land,  belonging  to  the  whole  community.  The  vil- 
lage assembly,  meeting  generally  in  the  church-yard  after 
mass,  fixed  the  day  for  planting  and  harvesting,  and  all 
other  matters  relating  to  the  common  interest.  If  the 
business  to  be  transacted  related  to  the  church,  the  presid- 
ing officer  was  the  priest ;  otherwise  the  syndic  presided  at 
the  meeting  and  saw  to  the  execution  of  the  decisions  of 
the  assembly.28  The  military  commandant  of  the  Illinois 
country  was  responsible  to  the  governor  of  Louisiana,  while 
civil  officials  were  under  the  direction  of  the  intendant. 

All  the  land  holdings  of  the  French  did  not  originate  in 
the  same  way.  The  land  acquired  from  the  Indians  was 
considered  as  belonging  to  the  king's  domain,  which  was 
disposed  of  in  two  ways.29  At  Kaskaskia  and  Nouvelle 
Chartres  the  king  retained  control  of  the  land  and  granted 
it  directly  to  the  habitants™  in  censive  holdings,  but  at 
Cahokia,  St.  Philippe,  and  Prairie  du  Rocher,  large  tracts 
were  granted  to  individuals  as  seigniories,  the  title  being 
similar  to  that  of  the  benefice.  The  owners  of  these 
seigniories  granted  out  smaller  tracts  to  the  habitants  as 

27Babeau,  Le  village  sous  fancien  regime,  passim,  and  Babeau,  Les 
assemblies  generates  des  communautes  cohabitants,  passim. 

28  Babeau,  Le  village  sous  Vancien  regime,  ch.  III. 

29  Alvord,  ///.   Hist.  Colls.,  II,  xxii,  n.  2\   Franz,  Die  Kolonization 
des  Mississippitales,  201;   Breese,  Early  Hist,  of  III.,  app.  E;  Viollet, 
Histoire  du  dro  it  f ran  fats,  j^Gft. 

30  Habitants  is  here  used  in  the  broader  sense  of  inhabitants. 


INTRODUCTORY  SURVEY  n 

manorial  holdings  which  paid  to  the  seignior  an  annual  rent 
of  a  sou  an  acre.  Cahokia  and  its  lands  belonged  to  the 
Seminary  of  Foreign  Missions  at  Quebec,  St.  Philippe  to 
the  Regnaults,  and  Prairie  du  Rocher  to  Boisbriant,  and 
later  to  Langlois. 

The  church  is  an  institution  which  cannot  be  overlooked 
in  any  survey  of  the  Illinois  French.  The  people  were  so 
devoted  to  their  religion  that  the  church  buildings  were 
generally  the  most  imposing  edifices  in  the  village.  The 
parish  priests  at  all  times  exercised  the  greatest  influence 
over  the  lives  of  the  people.  No  matter  how  debauched 
and  lawless  the  voyageur  became,  the  priest  invariably 
recalled  him  to  a  sense  of  his  dependence  upon  the  church. 

There  were  a  number  of  parishes  in  the  district :  the 
parish  of  the  Immaculate  Conception  at  Kaskaskia,  that  of 
St.  Anne  at  Nouvelle  Chartres  with  its  dependent  chapels 
of  St.  Joseph  at  Prairie  du  Rocher  and  the  Visitation  at  St. 
Philippe,  and  the  parish  of  the  Holy  Family  at  Cahokia. 
The  Jesuits  governed  the  parish  at  Kaskaskia,  where  they 
owned  a  large  plantation,  a  brewery,  and  some  eighty 
slaves,31  and  the  Recollect  and  the  Sulpitian  fathers  min- 
istered to  the  other  villages.  These  parishes,  together 
with  those  of  the  rest  of  Louisiana,  were  in  the  diocese  of 
the  bishop  of  Quebec.32 

The  relation  of  the  Illinois  country  to  Louisiana  was 
economic  as  well  as  political.  All  of  the  trade  of  the  upper 
Mississippi  valley  was  carried  on  through  New  Orleans,  and 
the  southern  colony  often  owed  its  existence  to  the  large 
supplies  of  flour  and  pork  sent  down  the  river.33  Although 

31  Pittman,  State  of  the  European  Settlements  on  the  Miss.,  ed. 
Hodder,  85. 

82  Shea,  Life  of  Archbishop  Carroll,  passim. 

38  Winsor,  Narr.  and  Crit.  Hist,  of  Am.,  V,  53;  Pittman,  European 
Settlements  on  the  Miss.,  ed.  Hodder,  95. 


12  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

the  inhabitants  occupied  themselves  chiefly  with  hunting 
and  with  trading  with  the  Indians ,  they  yet  raised  a  con- 
siderable amount  of  corn,  wheat,  and  various  kinds  of  fruit, 
which,  together  with  cattle  and  hogs  they  frequently  shipped 
to  the  New  Orleans  market.3* 

S4Pittman,  op.  cit.,  93-95. 


CHAPTER  II. 

STATUS  OF  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY  IN  THE  EMPIRE. 

BEFORE  entering  upon  the  more  detailed  study  of  events 
in  the  Illinois  country  during  the  British  regime ,  it  seems 
necessary  to  examine  certain  general  aspects  of  the  subject 
in  order  to  understand  more  clearly  the  significance  of  the 
period.  The  relation  of  that  country  to  the  empire,  and 
the  views  held  by  contemporary  British  statesmen  concern- 
ing its  status  are  problems  which  naturally  arise  and  de- 
mand solution.  What  was  the  nature  of  the  government 
imposed  upon  the  French  in  the  Illinois  country  after  the 
final  occupation  of  the  West?  Is  the  prevailing  opinion 
that  the  British  government  placed  the  inhabitants  of  those 
villages  under  a  military  government  any  longer  tenable? 
Was  the  government  de  jure  or  de  factot 

The  treatment  received  by  the  settlements  in  the  North- 
west and  West  in  general  was  fundamentally  different  in 
nature  from  that  accorded  other  portions  of  the  new  em- 
pire. The  treaty  of  Paris  was  signed  in  February,  1763, 
and  the  British  ministry  spent  considerable  time  during  the 
months  immediately  following  in  the  formulation  of  a  policy 
to  be  pursued  towards  the  vast  territories  acquired  in  North 
America.  In  the  summer  of  1763  it  became  apparent  that 
this  policy  must  be  determined  upon  immediately  in  order 
to  pacify  the  minds  of  the  savage  inhabitants  of  the  West 
who  were  rising  in  rebellion  against  the  English.  In 


i4  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

October,  therefore,  a  royal  proclamation1  was  issued,  by 
the  terms  of  which  civil  governments  were  created  for  the 
provinces  of  Quebec,  East  Florida,  West  Florida,  and 
Grenada,  and  all  the  western  territory  outside  the  pre- 
scribed limits  of  these  colonies,  including  a  large  portion  of 
southern  Canada  of  today,  was  reserved  as  a  vast  hunting 
ground  for  the  Indian  nations.  No  mention  of  the  settled 
portions  of  the  West,  however,  is  made  in  the  proclama- 
tion. It  is  therefore  necessary  to  examine  the  official 
correspondence  which  immediately  preceded  the  issuance 
of  the  proclamation,  to  find,  if  possible,  what  the  directors 
of  the  British  colonial  policy  had  in  mind. 

When  the  proclamation  was  under  discussion  by  the 
ministry  in  the  summer  of  1763,  two  opposing  views  with 
reference  to  the  West  were  for  a  time  apparent.  It  appears 
to  have  been  the  policy  of  Lord  Egremont,  at  that  time 
secretary  of  state  for  the  southern  department,  which  in- 
cluded the  management  of  the  colonies,  to  place  the 
unorganized  territory  within  the  jurisdiction  of  some  one  of 
the  colonies  possessing  a  settled  government,  preferably 
Canada.'2  It  was  at  least  his  aim  to  give  to  the  Indian 
country  sufficient  civil  supervision  so  that  criminals  and 
fugitives  from  justice  from  the  colonies  might  be  retaken. 
That  he  did  not  intend  to  extend  civil  government  to  the 
villages  of  Illinois  or  to  any  of  the  French  inhabitants  of 
the  West  seems  clear,  for  his  only  reference  is  to  the  "  In- 
dian country"  and  to  "  criminals  "  and  "fugitives  from 
justice  ". 

1  The  text  of  the  proclamation  may  be  conveniently  found  in  the 
Annual  Register,  IV,  208,  and  in  Can.  Const.  Docs.,  //jy-//?/,  119- 
123.  For  a  discussion  of  the  history  of  the  proclamation  and  the 
origin  of  the  various  clauses,  see  Alvord,  "Genesis  of  the  Proclama- 
tion of  1763  ",  in  Mich.  Pioneer  and  Hist.  Colls.,  XXXVI. 

3  Egremont  to  the  Lords  of  Trade,  July  14,  1763,  Can.  Const.  Docs., 


STATUS  IN  THE  EMPIRE  15 

Lord  Shelburne,  president  of  the  Board  of  Trade  and  a 
member  of  the  Grenville  ministry,  and  his  colleagues  were 
of  the  opinion  that  the  annexation  of  the  West  to  Canada 
might  lend  color  to  the  idea  that  England's  title  to  the  West 
came  from  the  French  cession,  when  in  fact  her  claim  was 
derived  from  other  sources ;  that  the  inhabitants  of  the 
province  to  which  it  might  be  annexed  would  have  too 
great  an  advantage  in  the  Indian  trade ;  and  finally  that 
such  an  immense  province  could  not  be  properly  governed 
without  a  large  number  of  troops  and  the  governor  would 
thus  virtually  become  a  commander-in-chief . 3  Shelburne 
then  announced  his  plan  of  giving  to  the  commanding  gen- 
eral of  the  British  army  in  America  jurisdiction  over  the 
West  for  the  purpose  of  protecting  the  Indians  and  the  fur 
trade. 4  Lord  Halifax,  who  succeeded  Egremont  at  the 
latter's  death  in  August,  1763,  acceded  to  Shelburne's 
views.  The  proposed  commission  to  the  commanding  gen- 
eral, however,  does  not  appear  to  have  been  issued;  for 
Hillsborough,  who  succeeded  Shelburne  as  president  of  the 
Board  of  Trade  in  the  autumn  of  1763,  favored  a  different 
policy.  But  there  is  nothing  to  indicate  that  Shelburne 
and  his  advisers  had  any  thought  of  a  government  for  the 
French  colonies.  No  hint  appears  in  the  correspondence 
that  the  ministry  had  any  idea  of  the  existence  of  the  sev- 
eral thousand  French  inhabitants  of  the  West.5 

'Representation  of  the  Lords  of  Trade  to  the  King,  August  5, 
1763,  Can.  Const.  Docs.^  1759-1791,  iio-m. 

4  "  We  would  humbly  propose,  that  a  Commission  under  the  Great 
Seal,  for  the  Government  of  this  Country,  should  be  given  to  the  Com- 
mander in  Chief  of  Your  Majesty's  Troops  for  the  time  being  adapted 
to  the  Protection  of  the  Indians  and  the  fur  Trade  of  Your  Majesty's 
subjects."  Ibid.,  ill. 

4  They  could  not  have  been  ignorant  of  the  existence  of  such  colonies 
in  the  ceded  territory,  for  Sir  William  Johnson,  who  was  familiar  with 
western  conditions,  was  in  constant  correspondence  with  the  ministry, 
and  such  works  as  the  Histoire  de  la  Louisiane  by  Du  Pratz,  published 
in  1758,  were  doubtless  familiar  to  English  statesmen. 


1 6  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

There  remain  one  or  two  documents  in  which  we  might 
expect  to  find  some  reference  to  the  government  of  the 
French  settlers.  The  authors  of  that  part  of  the  proclama- 
tion of  1763  which  provided  for  the  reservation  of  the  In- 
dian lands  and  the  regulation  of  the  trade , 6  had  in  con- 
templation an  elaborate  plan  comprehending  the  manage- 
ment of  both  in  the  whole  of  British  North  America. 7  It 
was  left  to  Hillsborough,  Shelburne's  successor  as  president 
of  the  Board  of  Trade,  to  direct  the  formulation  of  the 
plan,  which  was  finished  in  1764.  As  the  details  of  this 
program  will  be  taken  up  in  a  later  chapter, 8  it  will  suffice 
here  simply  to  note  the  presence  or  absence  of  any  provi- 
sion for  the  French.  The  chief  object  of  the  plan  was  to 
bring  about  centralization  in  the  regulation  of  the  trade  and 
the  management  of  the  Indians.  In  one  article  provision 
also  was  made  for  a  certain  kind  of  civil  supervision.  For 
the  maintenance  of  peace  and  order  within  the  reserved 
territory,  the  general  superintendents  and  the  commis- 
saries at  each  post  were  empowered  to  act  as  justices  of 
the  peace,  with  all  the  powers  belonging  to  such  officers 
in  the  English  colonies.  They  were  to  have  "full  power 
of  Committing  Offenders  in  Capital  Cases,  in  order  that 
such  Offenders  may  be  prosecuted  for  the  same ;  And  that, 
for  deciding  all  civil  actions,  the  Commissaries  be  empow- 
ered to  try  and  determine  in  a  Summary  way  all  such 
Actions,  as  well  between  the  Indians  and  Traders,  as  be- 
tween one  Trader  and  another,  to  the  Amount  of  Ten  Pounds 
Sterling,  with  the  Liberty  of  Appeal  to  the  Chief  Agent  or 
Superintendent,  or  his  Deputy,  who  shall  be  empowered 

6  See  below,  ch.  V. 

7 Dartmouth  to  Cramah6,  December  I,   1773,   Can.   Const. 
*759-i79*>  339- 
*  See  below,  ch.  V. 


STATUS  IN  THE  EMPIRE  17 

upon  such  appeal  to  give  Judgement  thereon  ;  which  Judge- 
ment shall  be  final,  and  process  issue  upon  it,  in  like  manner 
as  on  the  Judgement  of  any  Court  of  Common  Pleas  estab- 
lished in  any  of  the  Colonies."9  It  is  curious  that  no 
provision  of  this  article  applies  in  any  way  to  the  govern- 
ment of  the  French  residing  at  the  various  posts. 

Turning  to  another  source ,  we  find  a  document  addressed 
directly  to  the  inhabitants  of  the  Illinois  country,  dated  in 
New  York,  December  30,  1764  and  signed  by  General 
Thomas  Gage , 10  which  was  not  announced  in  Illinois  until 
the  entry  of  Captain  Sterling  in  October  of  the  following 
year.  This  proclamation  related  solely  to  guarantees  by 
the  British  government  of  the  right  of  the  inhabitants  under 
the  treaty  of  Paris :  freedom  of  religion ,  the  liberty  of  re- 
moving from  or  remaining  within  English  territory,  and 
regulations  concerning  the  oath  of  allegiance  make  up  its 
contents.  Whether  the  inhabitants  were  to  enjoy  a  civil 
government  or  be  ruled  by  the  army  there  is  no  intimation. 

In  contrast  with  the  barren  papers  of  1763-1765  the 
documentary  material  after  those  dates  proves  so  much 
more  productive,  that  we  are  enabled  to  arrive  at  some 
pretty  definite  conclusions.  Fortunately  there  were  a  few 
men  in  authority  during  that  period  who  had  considerable 
interest  in  the  interior  settlements,  and  who,  from  their 
official  positions,  realized  the  difficulties  of  the  problem. 
General  Thomas  Gage,  Sir  William  Johnson,  and  Lord 
Hillsborough  are  perhaps  the  most  representative  ex- 
amples. Gage,  who  was  commander-in-chief  of  the  British 
army  in  America  throughout  the  period  under  considera- 
tion, with  headquarters  in  New  York  City,  was  in  direct 

9  Can.  Arch.  Report,  1904,  244. 

10  American  *  State  Papers,  Public  Lands,  II,  209;   Dillon,  Hist,  oj 
Indiana,  I,  93-94;  see  below,  ch.  IV. 


1 8  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1773 

communication  both  with  his  subordinates  in  Illinois  and 
with  the  home  authorities  and  was  in  a  position  to  know 
the  general  state  of  affairs  in  the  West  as  well  as  to  keep  in 
touch  with  ministerial  opinion.  Sir  William  Johnson,  by 
virtue  of  his  office  as  superintendent  of  Indian  affairs 
for  the  northern  district,  was  in  a  peculiarly  strategic  posi- 
tion for  acquiring  information.  His  Indian  agents  were 
stationed  at  all  the  western  posts  and  he  was  in  con- 
stant correspondence  with  the  Board  of  Trade  relative  to 
the  Indian  and  trade  conditions.  In  the  ministry  itself 
the  correspondence  of  Lord  Hillsborough  perhaps  best 
reflects  the  prevailing  opinion  of  the  government.  He 
was  one  of  the  few  ministerial  authorities  who  took  any 
considerable  interest  in  the  western  problem  and  informa- 
tion coming  from  him  must  therefore  have  weight. 

That  the  British  commandant  of  the  fort  in  the  Illinois 
country  had  no  commission  to  govern  the  inhabitants,  ex- 
cept that  power  which  naturally  devolves  upon  the  military 
officer  in  the  absence  of  all  other  authority,11  appears 
amply  clear  from  a  recommendation  transmitted  by  Gen- 
eral Gage  to  his  superior,  Secretary  Conway,  shortly  after 
the  occupation  of  Fort  de  Chartres  :  "If  I  may  presume 
to  give  my  opinion  further  on  this  matter,  I  would  humbly 
propose  that  a  Military  Governor  should  be  appointed  for 
the  Illinois  [sic]  as  soon  as  possible.  The  distance  of 
that  country  from  any  of  the  Provinces  being  about  1400 
Miles,  makes  its  Dependance  upon  any  one  of  them  im- 

11  "  The  Secretary  of  State  having  signified  to  me  that  as  my  Com- 
mission under  the  Great  Seal  as  Commander-in-Chief  of  all  His 
Majesty's  Forces  in  North  America  includes  Florida  and  the  Country 
ceded  by  Spain,  on  this  Continent,  and  likewise  the  Country  ceded  by 
France  on  the  left  side  of  the  Mississippi:  It  is  the  King's  Pleasure  I 
should  give  the  necessary  Orders  to  the  Officers  commanding  the 
Troops,  etc."  Amherst  to  Lieutenant-Colonel  Robertson,  August  24, 
1763,  P.  R.  O.,  B.  T.  Papers,  no.  19,  fol.  49. 


STATUS  IN  THE  EMPIRE  19 

practicable,  and  from  its  Vicinity  to  the  French  Settlements, 
no  other  than  a  Military  Government  would  answer  our  pur- 
pose."12  In  the  following  year  he  took  a  similar  view  in  a 
communication  to  Sir  William  Johnson,  his  co- laborer  in 
America :  "I  am  quite  sensible  of  the  irregular  behavior  of 
the  Traders  and  have  intimated  to  his  Majesty's  Secretary 
of  State  what  I  told  the  Board  of  Trade  four  or  five  years 
ago  :  That  they  must  be  restrained  by  Law,  and  a  Judicial 
Power  invested  in  the  Officer  Commanding  at  the  Posts  to 
see  such  Law  put  in  force.  And  without  this,  Regulations 
may  be  made,  but  they  will  never  be  observed."  13 

During  this  period  the  authorities  seemed  unable  to  com- 
bat successfully  the  condition  of  comparative  anarchy  in 
the  Illinois  country  and  indeed  in  all  the  western  posts  and 
throughout  the  Indian  country.  Had  all  the  regulations 
outlined  in  1764  in  the  plan  for  the  management  of  Indian 
affairs14  been  put  into  operation,  the  Indian  department 
would  have  been  able  to  cope  more  successfully  with  that 
phase  of  the  situation.  But  neither  military  nor  Indian 
departments  had  legal  authority  to  administer  justice  in  the 
West.15  In  1767,  speaking  of  his  inability  to  handle  the 

12  Gage  to  Conway,  March  28,  1766,  B.  T.  Papers  (Hist.  Soc.  Pa.), 
vol.  XX. 

15  Gage  to  Johnson,  January  25,  1767,  Johnson  MSS.  (N.  Y.  State 
Library),  vol.  XIV,  no.  28. 

14  See  below,  ch.  V. 

15  In  the  Mutiny  Act,  passed  in  1765,  a  clause  was  inserted  regulating 
criminal  procedure  in  the  Indian  country,  whereby  persons  accused  of 
crimes  were  directed  to  be  conveyed  to  the  civil  magistrate  of  the  next 
adjoining  province,  where  they  should  be  tried.     "  .  An  Act  for 
punishing  Mutiny  and   Desertion,  and  for  the  better  Payment  of  the 
Army  and  their  Quarters."      5  Geo.   Ill,  cap.  XXXIII.     This  was 
evidently  too  slow  a  process.     I  have  found  but  one  case  in  the  his- 
tory of  the  Illinois  colony  where  the  clause  was  executed.     October 
7,  1769,  Gage  wrote  to  Hillsborough :   "Two  persons  are  confined  in 
Fort   Chartres  for  murther,   and   the   Colonel   [Wilkins]  proposes  to 
send  them  to  Philadelphia,  about  fifteen  hundred  miles,  to  take  their 
Tryall."     P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  125. 


20  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

situation  for  lack  of  sufficient  powers,  Johnson  declared 
that  "  The  authority  of  Commissaries  is  nothing,  and  both 
the  Commanding  Officers  of  Garrisons  and  they,  are  liable 
to  a  civil  prosecution  for  detaining  a  Trader  on  any  pre- 
tence." I6  Writing  of  the  disturbances  which  occurred  in 
Illinois  a  few  years  later,  the  commanding  general  observed 
still  more  emphatically  :  "  And  I  perceive  there  has  been 
wanting  judicial  powers  to  try  and  determine.  There  has 
been  no  way  to  bring  Controversys  and  Disputes  properly 
to  a  determination  or  delinquents  to  punishment."  " 

There  is  probably  some  justification  for  the  current  be- 
lief that  the  government  placed  the  inhabitants  under  a 
military  rule,  inasmuch  as  the  actual  government  proved  in 
the  last  analysis  to  be  military.  That  the  British  ministry 
consciously  attached  the  interior  settlements  to  the  military 
department  is,  however,  far  from  the  truth.  Such  a  system 
of  government  was  probably  contemplated  by  no  one  be- 
tween the  years  1763  and  1765  when  the  reorganization  of 
the  new  acquisitions  was  under  consideration.  A  large  part 
of  the  new  territory  was  believed  to  be  within  the  fur-bear- 
ing region  and  the  desire  for  the  development  of  the  fur 
trade  controlled  in  the  main  the  policy  of  the  ministry  re- 
lative to  the  disposition  of  the  ''peltry"  districts.  The  in- 
terests of  the  settlements  were  therefore  completely  ignored. 

Secretary  Hillsborough,  who  helped  formulate  the  western 

16  "  Review  of  the  Trade  and  Affairs  of  the  Indians  in  the  Northern 
District  of  America",  N.  Y.  Col.  Docs.,  VII,  964. 

11  Gage  to  Hillsborough,  August  6,  1771,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I., 
vol.  128.  See  also  Gage  to  Hillsborough,  October  7,  1769,  ibid.,  vol. 
125.  Lieutenant  George  Phyn,  who  went  with  a  detachment  of  troops 
from  Fort  Pitt  down  the  Ohio  and  Mississippi  rivers  to  Mobile  in  1768, 
making  a  visit  of  several  weeks  at  Fort  de  Chartres,  wrote  to  Sir 
William  Johnson:  "There  is  no  settled  administration  of  Justice,  but 
the  whole  depends  upon  the  mere  will  and  fancy  of  the  Officer  com- 
manding the  Troops."  April  15,  1768,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol.  XXV, 
no,  109. 


S7A  7  US  IN  THE  EMPIRE  2 1 

policy  in  1763  and  1764,  doubtless  gave  the  most  adequate 
explanation  when,  in  1769,  he  wrote  :  "With  regard  to  the 
Posts  in  the  interior  Country  considered  in  another  view  in 
which  several  of  your  letters  have  placed  them  ;  I  mean  as 
to  the  Settlements  formed  under  their  protection,  which, 
not  being  included  within  the  jurisdiction  of  any  other 
Colony  are  exposed  to  many  Difficulties  and  Disadvantages 
from  the  Want  of  some  Form  of  Government  necessary  to 
Civil  Society,  it  is  very  evident  that,  if  the  case  of  these 
Settlements  had  been  well  known  or  understood  at  the  time 
of  forming  the  conquered  Lands  into  Colonies,  some  pro- 
vision would  have  been  made  for  them,  and  they  would 
have  been  erected  into  distinct  Governments  or  made  de- 
pendent upon  those  other  Colonies  of  which  they  were  either 
the  offspring,  or  with  which  they  did  by  circumstances  and 
situation,  stand  connected.  I  shall  not  fail,  therefore,  to 
give  this  matter  the  fullest  consideration  when  the  Business 
of  the  Illinois  Country  is  taken  up."  1S 

Hillsborough's  declaration  that  no  provision  for  the  gov- 
ernment of  the  settlements  had  ever  been  made  is  borne  out 
by  other  testimony.  A  writer  in  the  Annual  Register  for 
I763,19  after  describing  the  boundaries  of  the  various  gov- 
ernments provided  for  by  the  royal  proclamation,  comment- 
ed as  follows  :  "  The  reader  will  observe  and  possibly  with 
some  surprise,  that  in  this  distribution,  much  the  largest, 
and  perhaps,  the  most  valuable  part  of  our  conquests,  does 

18  Hillsborough  to  Gage,  December  9,  1769,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W. 
I.,  vol.  124.     "  If  the  people  are  left  to  shift  for  themselves  entirely 
without  any  arrangements  made  for  them,  its  possible  they  would  no 
longer  consider  themselves  subjects,  join  openly  with   enemy  Indians, 
and   British   traders  going  to  the  Ilinois  might  be  refused  admittance 
and   drove  out  of  the   Country."     Gage  to   Hillsborough,  March  4, 
1772,   Sparks  MSS.   (Harvard  College  Library),  XLIII,  vol.  3,  pp. 
164-165. 

19  Annual  Register,  VI,  20. 


22  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

not  fall  into  any  of  the  governments ;  that  the  environs  of 
the  great  lakes,  the  fine  countries  on  the  whole  course  of 
the  Ohio  and  Wabashe,  and  almost  all  that  tract  of  Louisi- 
ana, which  lies  on  the  hither  branch  of  the  Mississippi,  are 
none  of  them  comprehended  in  this  distribution  ..." 

In  1774  during  the  course  of  the  debate  in  the  House  of 
Lords  on  the  Quebec  Act,  which  provided  for  the  form  of 
government  and  the  extension  of  the  boundaries  of  that  col- 
ony to  the  Ohio  and  Mississippi  rivers,  Lord  North  observed 
that  "  It  takes  in  no  countries  regularly  planted  by  British 
settlers,  but  merely  distant  military  posts,  at  present  with- 
out any  government  but  that  of  the  respective  commanding 
officers.  Now,  the  question  here  is  merely  this,  Will  you 
annex  them  under  the  present  government?  Will  you  leave 
them  without  any  government?  or  will  you  form  Separate 
governments  and  colonies  of  them?  " ao  Finally  the  existence 
of  such  a  large  area  of  territory  without  a  government  was 
recognized  in  the  preamble  of  the  Quebec  Act  as  ultimately 
passed :  ' '  And  whereas,  by  the  Arrangements  made  by  the 
said  Royal  Proclamation,  a  very  large  Extent  of  Country, 
within  which  there  were  several  Colonies  and  Settlements 
of  the  Subjects  of  France,  who  claimed  to  remain  therein 
under  the  Faith  of  the  said  Treaty,  was  left  without  any 
Provision  being  made  for  the  Administration  of  Civil  Govern- 
ment therein."21 

20  Parl.  Hist.,  XVII,  1358.     William  Knox,  the  under  secretary  for 
the  colonies,  in  a  contemporaneous  pamphlet  makes  the  following  as- 
sertion:   "As  these  settlers  had  been  put  entirely  under  the  direction 
of  the  commanding  Officers  of  the  forts  [during  the  French  rule],  when 
the  French  garrisons  were  withdrawn,  and  military  orders  ceased  to  be 
law,  they  were  altogether  without  law  or  government;  .    .      They  had 
been  accustomed  to  obey  French  military  orders,  and  the  English  offi- 
cers, .    .      of  their  own  authority  exercised  the  same  command  over 
them."     Justice  and  Policy  of  the  Quebec  Act,  39. 

21  Can.  Const.  Docs.,  1739-1791,  401.     In  a  paper  entitled  "  Pro- 
posed Extension  of  Provincial  Limits",  one  of  the  reasons  given  for  the 


STATUS  IN  THE  EMPIRE  23 

English  troops  took  formal  possession  of  Fort  de  Char- 
tres,  the  military  post  in  the  Illinois  country,  in  1765.  It 
was  not  intended,  however,  that  the  army  should  continue 
there  indefinitely.  'K  Nevertheless  as  time  went  on  the 
necessity  became  evident  of  being  constantly  prepared  to 
crush  a  possible  uprising  of  the  savages  and  to  repel  the 
constant  invasion  of  the  French  and  Spanish  traders  from 
beyond  the  Mississippi,  whose  influence  over  the  Indians, 
it  was  feared,  would  be  detrimental  to  the  peace  of  the  em- 
pire. In  its  policy  of  retrenchment  owing  to  the  trouble 
with  the  colonies,  the  government  at  various  times  contem- 
plated the  withdrawal  of  the  troops,23  but  each  time  the 
detachment  was  allowed  to  remain ;  the  sole  reason  given 
was  to  guard  that  portion  of  the  empire  against  the  French 
and  Indians.2* 

Attention  has  now  been  called  to  the  entire  absence  of 
regulations  for  the  government  of  the  western  settlements 
in  any  of  the  official  documents  relating  to  that  territory 
prior  to  1774.  The  proclamation  of  1763,  which  had  de- 
finitely extended  the  laws  of  England  to  the  new  provinces  of 
Quebec  and  the  Floridas,  made  no  similar  provision  for  the 
West.  This  statement  also  holds  for  other  state  papers  such 

extension  of  the  Quebec  boundary  was  to  "  extend  the  benefits  of  Civil 
Government  to  the  Settlements  of  Canadian  Subjects  that  have  been 
formed  in  the  different  parts  of"  the  interior  country,  ibid.,  381. 
In  the  first  two  draughts  of  the  Quebec  Act  no  reference  is  made  to 
the  western  settlements,  ibid.,  376—380. 

42  Hillsborough  to  Gage,  February  17,  1770,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W. 
I.,  vol.  125. 

13  "  The  situation  and  peculiar  circumstances  of  the  Ilinois  Country, 
and  the  use,  if  that  Country  is  maintained,  of  guarding  the  Ohio  and 
Ilinois  Rivers  at  or  near  their  junctions  with  the  Mississippi  has  been 
set  forth  to  your  Lordship  in  my  letter  of  the  22d  of  Feb.  last.  It  is 
upon  that  plan  the  Regiment  is  posted  in  the  Disposition  in  the  Ilinois 
Country."  Gage  to  Shelburne,  April  3,  1767,  ibid,,  vol.  123. 

24  See  for  example,  Hillsborough  to  Gage,  February  17,  1770,  ibid., 
vol.  125;  Gage  to  Shelburne,  April  3,  1767,  ibid.,  vol.  123. 


24  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

as  the  plan  of  1764  for  the  management  of  Indian  affairs 
and  General  Gage's  proclamation  to  the  inhabitants  of  Ill- 
inois in  1765.  Nor  in  any  of  the  correspondence  relating 
to  the  various  documents  has  any  reference  to  the  govern- 
ment of  the  French  been  discovered.  On  the  other  hand 
after  1765  we  have  the  positive  statements  of  such  officials 
as  Sir  William  Johnson,  General  Gage,  Lord  Hillsborough, 
and  Lord  North  to  the  effect  that  the  settlements  in  question 
had  been  left  entirely  without  any  arrangement  for  their 
government.  Similar  assertions  in  the  Quebec  Act  and  in 
contemporary  works,  books,  and  pamphlets  contribute  addi- 
tional testimony. 

In  the  course  of  this  inquiry  relative  to  the  legal  status  of 
Illinois  and  the  West  no  mention  has  been  made  of  the  ex- 
tension or  non- extension  of  English  law  and  custom  to  the 
West  after  the  cession.  This  is  one  of  the  more  important 
general  aspects  of  the  western  problem  and  merits  attention 
inasmuch  as  it  may  throw  further  light  on  the  legal  position 
of  the  settlements.  During  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth 
centuries,  the  great  era  of  English  colonization,  the  ne- 
cessity of  fixing  definitely  the  legal  status  of  the  colonies 
called  forth  a  series  of  judicial  opinions  and  legal  commen- 
taries. It  is  to  these  that  we  have  to  look  to  determine  the 
theory  held  regarding  the  application  of  English  law  to  the 
colonies  and  particularly  to  conquered  provinces.  In  gen- 
eral it  may  be  said  that  Blackstone  represents  the  usual 
view  taken  by  jurists  during  these  two  centuries.  In  his 
Commentaries  published  in  1765  he  declared  that  "  In 
conquered  or  ceded  countries,  that  have  already  laws  of 
their  own,  the  king  may  indeed  alter  and  change  those  laws, 
but  until  he  actually  does  change  them,  the  ancient  laws  of 
the  country  remain."25  This  opinion  is  supported  by  the 

16  Blackstone,  Commentaries  (3d  ed.,  Cooley),  Intro.,  sec.  4,  107. 


STATUS  IN  THE  EMPIRE  25 

authority  of  Lord  Mansfield  in  his  decision  in  the  case  of 
Campbell  v.  Hall,26  rendered  in  1774,  which  involved  the 
status  of  the  island  of  Grenada,  a  conquered  province.  He 
laid  down  in  this  decision  the  general  principle  that  the 
' '  laws  of  a  conquered  country  continue  in  force  until  they 
are  altered  by  the  conquerer.  The  justice  and  antiquity  of 
this  maxim  are  incontrovertible  .  .  ." 27 

As  has  already  been  suggested  the  proclamation  of  1763 
failed  to  extend  English  law  to  the  West,  nor  did  the  crown 
ever  take  such  action.  We  may  therefore  lay  down  the 
general  principle  that  although  with  the  change  of  sover- 
eignty the  public  law  of  England  was  substituted  for  that 
of  France,  the  private  law  of  the  province  remained  un- 
changed. The  British  government  then  was  obliged  to  govern 
its  new  subjects  in  this  region  according  to  the  laws  and 
customs  hitherto  prevailing  among  them  ;  any  other  course 
would  manifestly  be  illegal.  The  commanding  general  of 
the  army  in  America  and  his  subordinates,  who  were  em- 
barrassed by  the  presence  of  this  French  settlement  for 
which  no  provision  had  been  made  by  the  ministry,  and 
who  found  it  necessary  to  assume  the  obligation  of  enforc- 
ing some  sort  of  order  in  that  country,  had  no  power  to 
displace  any  of  the  laws  and  customs  of  the  French  inhabi- 
tants. It  will  be  pointed  out  in  succeeding  chapters  that 
this  general  principle,  although  adhered  to  in  many  respects, 
was  not  uniformly  carried  out. 

16 Text  of  decision  in  Can.  Const.  Docs.,  1759-1791,  366-372. 

27  Other  important  leading  cases,  such  as  Calvin's  case,  involving  the 
status  of  Jamaica,  are  of  the  same  effect.  See  also  Sioussat,  English 
Statutes  in  Maryland  (J.  H.  U.  Studies,  XXI),  481-487,  and  espe- 
cially Walton,  The  Scope  and  Interpretation  of  the  Civil  Code  of  Lower 
Canada,  6-7,  26-27.  The  same  opinion  is  expressed  by  Attorney- 
General  Thurlow  in  a  speech  in  Parliament  in  1774  on  the  subject  of 
the  Quebec  Act.  This  speech  is  found  in  Egerton  and  Grant,  Canadian 
Const.  Development,  33-41. 


26  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

It  is  apparent  from  the  foregoing  considerations  that  the 
government  of  the  Illinois  people  was  de  facto  in  its  nature. 
It  had  no  legal  foundations.  Every  act  of  the  military 
department  was  based  on  expediency.  Although  in  general 
this  course  was  accepted  by  the  home  authorities,  all  offi- 
cials concerned  were  aware  that  such  a  status  could  not 
continue  indefinitely.  Nevertheless  it  did  continue  for  a- 
bout  a  decade,  during  which  time  the  inhabitants  were  at 
the  mercy  of  some  six  or  seven  different  military  command- 
ants. In  1774,  however,  Parliament  passed  the  Quebec 
Act,  which  provided,  among  other  things,  for  the  union  of 
all  the  western  country  north  of  the  Ohio  River,  which  but 
for  the  cataclysm  of  the  American  Revolution  would  have 
secured  civil  government  for  the  whole  region. 


CHAPTER  III. 

OCCUPATION  OF  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY 

By  the  treaty  of  Paris  the  title  to  the  Illinois  region  pass- 
ed to  Great  Britain,  but  Fort  de  Chartres  was  not  immedi- 
ately occupied.  Detachments  of  British  troops  had  taken 
possession  of  practically  every  other  post  in  the  newly  ceded 
territory  as  early  as  1760.  The  occupation  of  the  forest 
posts  of  Green  Bay,  Mackinac,  St.  Joseph,  Ouiatanon,  De- 
troit, Fort  Miami,  Sandusky,  Niagara,  and  others  seemed 
to  indicate  almost  complete  British  dominion  in  the  West. 
The  transfer  of  the  Illinois  posts,  however,  remained  to 
be  effected,  and  although  in  the  summer  of  1763  orders 
were  forwarded  from  France  to  the  officers  commanding  in 
the  ceded  territory  to  evacuate  as  soon  as  the  English  forces 
appeared , l  almost  three  years  elapsed  before  the  occupa- 
tion was  accomplished ;  for  soon  after  the  announcement  of 
the  treaty  of  cession ,  the  chain  of  Indian  tribes  stretching 
from  the  fringe  of  the  eastern  settlements  to  the  Mississippi 
River  rose  in  rebellion.2  This  unexpected  movement  had 
to  be  reckoned  with  before  any  thought  of  the  occupation 
of  the  Illinois  country  could  be  seriously  entertained. 

Of  the  two  great  northern  Indian  families,  the  Iroquois 
had  generally  espoused  the  English  cause  during  the  recent 

1  Parkman,  Conspiracy  of  Pontiac,  II,  272-273. 

2  For  the  Indian  rebellion  the  best  secondary  accounts  are :   Park- 
man,   Conspiracy  of  Pontiac;   Kingsford,  Hist,  of  Can.,  V,   1-112; 
Poole,  "The  West ",  in  Winsor,  Narr.  and  Crit.  Hist,  of  Am.,  VI, 
684-700;   Winsor,  Miss.  Basin,  432-446;   Bancroft,  Hist,  of  U.  S. 
(ed.  of  1852,  containing  references),  IV,  110-133. 

27 


28  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

war,  while  the  Algonquin  nations,  living  in  Canada  and 
the  lake  and  Ohio  regions,  had  supported  the  French.  At 
the  close  of  the  war  the  greater  portion  of  the  French  had 
sworn  fealty  to  the  English  crown,  although  the  allegiance 
of  their  allies,  the  Algonquins,  was  at  best  only  temporary. 
It  was  thought  that,  since  the  power  of  France  had  been 
crushed,  there  would  be  no  further  motive  for  the  Indian 
tribes  to  continue  hostilities.  From  1761,  however,  there 
had  been  a  growing  feeling  of  discontent  among  the  western 
Indians.  So  long  as  France  and  Great  Britain  were  able  to 
hold  each  other  in  check  in  America  the  Indian  nations 
formed  a  balance  of  power,  so  to  speak,  between  them. 
England  and  France  vied  with  each  other  to  conciliate 
the  savages  and  to  win  their  good-will.  As  soon,  however, 
as  English  dominion  was  assured,  this  attitude  was  some- 
what changed.  The  fur  trade  under  the  French  had  been 
well  regulated,  but  its  condition  under  the  English  from 
1760  to  1763  was  deplorable.3  The  English  traders  were 
rash  and  unprincipled  men 4  who  did  not  scruple  to  cheat 
and  insult  their  Indian  clients  at  every  opportunity.  The 
more  intelligent  of  the  western  and  northern  Indians  per- 
ceived that  their  hunting  grounds  would  soon  be  overrun 
by  white  settlers  with  a  fixed  purpose  of  permanent  settle- 
ment. 5  This  was  probably  the  chief  cause  of  the  Indian  up- 
rising. There  remained  in  the  forests  many  French  and 
renegade  traders  and  hunters  who  constantly  concocted 

3Parkman,  Conspiracy  of  Pontiac,  I,  182;  Pownall,  Admin,  of  (he 
Cols.,  I,  187-188.  Although  Pownall  discusses  the  situation  somewhat 
earlier,  he  appears  to  hold  the  same  view  which  Johnson  and  other 
contemporaries  express  later. 

4  Johnson  to  Lords  of  Trade,  N.  Y.  Col.  Docs.,  VII,  929,  955,  960, 
964,  987;  Pownall,  Admin,  of  the  Cols.,  I,  188;  Kingsford,  Hist,  of 
Can.,  V,  I2lff. 

5 Johnson  to  Amherst,  July  11,  1763,  N.  Y.  Col.  Docs.,  VII,  532; 
Pownall,  Admin,  of  the  Cols.,  I,  187-190. 


OCCUPATION 


29 


insidious  reports  as  to  English  designs  and  filled  the  savage 
minds  with  hope  of  succor  from  the  king  of  France. 
Many  of  the  French  inhabitants  had  since  1760  emigrated 
beyond  the  Mississippi,  because,  as  the  Indians  thought, 
they  feared  to  live  under  English  rule. 7  This  doubtless 
contributed  something  towards  the  rising  discontent  of  the 
savages.  Finally  the  policy  of  economy  in  expenses,  which 
General  Amherst  inaugurated,  cut  off  a  large  part  of  the 
Indian  presents,  always  so  indispensable  in  dealing  with 
that  race ,  and  augured  poorly  for  the  future  welfare  of  the 
Indians. 

The  mass  of  the  Indians  rose  chiefly  from  resentment, 
but  Pontiac,  the  great  chief  of  the  Ottawas,  acted  from  a 
deeper  motive.  He  determined  to  rehabilitate  French 
power  in  the  West  and  to  reunite  all  the  Indian  nations  into 
one  great  confederacy  in  order  to  ward  off  approaching 
dangers.  During  the  years  1761-1762  he  developed  the 
plot  and  in  1762  he  despatched  his  emissaries  to  all  the 
Indian  nations.  The  ramifications  of  the  conspiracy  ex- 
tended to  all  the  Algonquin  tribes,  to  some  of  the  nations 
on  the  lower  Mississippi,  and  even  to  a  portion  of  the  Six 
Nations.  The  original  aim  of  the  plot  was  the  destruction 
of  the  garrisons  on  the  frontier,  after  which  the  settlements 
were  to  be  attacked.  The  assault  on  the  outposts,  begin- 
ning in  May,  1 763,  was  sudden  and  overwhelming ;  Detroit, 
Fort  Pitt,  and  Niagara  alone  held  out,  the  remainder  of  the 
posts  falling  without  an  attempt  at  defense.  Had  the 
proclamation  of  1763,  which  aimed  at  the  pacification  of 
the  Indians  by  reserving  to  them  the  western  lands,  been 

6 Johnson  to  Amherst,  July  II,  1763,  N.  Y.  Col.  Docs.,  Mil,  532; 
Pownall,  Admin,  of  the  Cols.,  I,  187—190. 

7  Parkman,  Conspiracy  of  Pontiac,  I,  181,  quoting  from  a  letter  of 
Sir  William  Johnson  to  Governor  Golden,  December  24,  1763;  Winsor, 
Miss.  Basin,  433. 


3o  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

issued  earlier  in  the  year,  this  devastating  war  might  have 
been  avoided.  Peaceful  pacification  was  now,  however, 
out  of  the  question.  During  the  summers  of  1763  and 
1764  Colonel  Bouquet  raised  the  siege  of  Fort  Pitt,  pene- 
trated the  enemy's  country  in  the  upper  Ohio  Valley,  and 
completely  subdued  the  Shawnee  and  Delaware  tribes  upon 
whom  Pontiac  had  depended.  Previous  to  Bouquet's 
second  campaign,  Colonel  Bradstreet  had  advanced  with  a 
detachment  along  the  southern  shore  of  Lake  Erie,  pene- 
trating as  far  west  as  Detroit,  whence  companies  were  sent 
to  occupy  the  posts  in  the  upper  lake  region.  In  the  cam- 
paign as  a  whole  the  Bouquet  expedition  was  the  most  ef- 
fective. After  the  ratification  of  a  series  of  treaties,  in 
which  the  Indians  promised  allegiance  to  the  English  crown, 
the  eastern  portion  of  the  rebellion  was  broken. 

It  now  remained  to  reach  the  Illinois  country  in  order  to 
relieve  the  French  garrison  at  Fort  de  Chartres.  Pontiac 
had  retired  thither  in  1764,  after  his  unsuccessful  attempt 
upon  Detroit.  There  he  had  hoped  to  rally  the  western 
tribes  and  sue  for  the  support  of  the  French.  But  as  we 
shall  see,  his  schemes  received  a  powerful  blow  by  the  re- 
fusal of  the  commandants  to  countenance  his  plans. 

To  what  extent  Pontiac  was  assisted  by  French  intriguers 
in  the  development  of  his  plans  may  never  be  positively 
known.  As  has  already  been  pointed  out,  French  traders 
were  constantly  among  the  Indians,  filling  their  minds  with 
hopes  and  fears.  That  the  plot  included  French  officials 
may  be  doubted,  although  Sir  William  Johnson  and  General 
Gage  seemed  convinced  that  such  was  the  case.8  Their 

8 Johnson  to  Lords  of  Trade,  July  I,  1763,  N.  Y.  Col.  Docs.,  VII, 
525;  Johnson  to  Amherst,  July  8,  1763,  ibid.,  531;  Johnson  to  Lords 
of  Trade,  December  26,  1764,  ibid.,  688-689;  Gage  to  Bouquet,  June 
5,  1764,  Can.  Arch.  (Ottawa),  series  A,  vol.  8,  p.  409;  Gage  to 
Bouquet,  October  21,  1764,  ibid.,  p.  479;  Johnson  to  Governor 
Golden,  January  22,  1765,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol.  X,  no.  99. 


OCCUPATION  3I 

belief,  however,  was  based  almost  wholly  upon  reports  from 
Indian  runners,  whose  credibility  as  witnesses  may  well  be 
questioned.  A  perusal  of  the  correspondence  of  the  French 
officials9  residing  in  Illinois  and  Louisiana,  and  of  their 
official  communications  with  the  Indians  during  this  period 
goes  far  to  clear  them  of  complicity  in  the  affair. 10 

General  Gage,  who  succeeded  Amherst  as  commander- 
in-chief  of  the  British  army  in  America  in  November,  1763, 
was  convinced  that  the  early  occupation  of  the  western 
posts  was  essential, "  since  it  would  in  a  measure  cut  off 
communication  between  the  French  and  the  Indian  nations 
dwelling  in  that  vicinity.  The  Indians,  finding  themselves 
thus  inclosed,  would  be  more  easily  pacified.  The  partici- 
pation in  the  rebellion  of  the  Shawnee  and  Delaware  tribes 
of  the  upper  Ohio  River  region  precluded  for  a  time,  how- 
ever, the  possibility  of  reaching  the  Mississippi  posts  by  way 
of  Fort  Pitt  without  a  much  larger  force  than  Gage  had  at 
his  command  in  the  East,  and  the  colonies  were  already 
avoiding  the  call  for  additional  troops. u  The  only  other 
available  route  was  by  way  of  New  Orleans  and  the  Missis- 
sippi River,  whose  navigation  had  been  declared  open  to 

9  Can.  Arch.  Report,  1905,  I,  470;  Neyon  to  Kerlerec,  December  i, 
1763,  Bancroft  Coll.  (Lenox  Library);   extracts  from  letters  of  d'Ab- 
badie,  January,  1764,  Can.  Arch.  Report,  1905,  I,  471;   d'Abbadie  to 
the  French  minister,  1764,  ibid. ,  472. 

10  This  is  the  view  taken   by  Parkman,  Conspiracy  of  Pontiac,  II, 
279,  and  by  Bancroft,  Hist,  of  U.  S.,  V,  133,  136.     But  Kingsford, 
Hist,  of  Can.,  V,  25,  takes  an  opposite  view.     He  says  that  the  "  high 
character  claimed  for  Pontiac  cannot   be  established  .    .       He  can  be 
looked   upon  in  no  higher  light,  than  the  instrument  of  the   French 
officials  and  Traders."     On  page  6  he  declares  that  "there  is  no  evi- 
dence to  establish  him  as  the  central  figure  organizing  this  hostile  feel- 
ing." 

"Gage  to  Halifax,  July  13,  1764,  Bancroft  Coll.,  Eng.  and  Am., 
1764-1765;  Winsor,  Miss.  Basin,  444,  456;  Winsor,  Narr.  and  Crit. 
Hist,  of  Am. ,  VI,  702. 

"Beer,  British  Colonial  Policy,  263;  Kingsford,  Hist,  of  Can.,  V, 
68. 


32  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

the  French  and  English  alike  by  the  treaty  of  Paris.  Little 
opposition  might  be  expected  from  the  southern  Indians 
toward  whom  a  liberal  policy  had  been  pursued.  Presents 
to  the  value  of  four  or  five  thousand  pounds  had  been  sent 
to  Charleston  in  1763  for  distribution  among  the  southern 
nations  which  counteracted  in  a  large  measure  the  machina- 
tions of  the  French  traders  from  New  Orleans. 13  The 
Florida  posts,  Mobile  and  Pensacola,  were  already  occupied 
by  English  troops,  and  Gage  and  his  associates  believed 
that  with  the  cooperation  of  the  French  governor  of  Louisiana 
a  successful  ascent  could  be  made.  u 

Accordingly  in  January,  1764,  Major  Arthur  Loftus,  with 
a  detachment  of  three  hundred  and  fifty-one  men  from  the 
Twenty-second  Regiment  embarked  at  Mobile  for  New 
Orleans ,  where  preparations  were  to  be  made  for  the  voy- 
age. 15  A  company  of  sixty  men  from  this  regiment  were 
to  be  left  at  Fort  Massac  on  the  Ohio  River,  and  the  re- 
mainder were  to  occupy  Kaskaskia  and  Fort  de  Chartres.  " 
At  New  Orleans  boats  had  to  be  built,  supplies  and  pro- 
visions procured ,  and  guides  and  interpreters  provided.17  The 
expedition  set  out  from  New  Orleans  February  2  7 .  Three 
weeks  later  the  flotilla  was  attacked  by  a  band  of  Tonica 
Indians  near  Davion's  Bluff,  or  Fort  Adams,18  about  two  hun- 

18Winsor,  Miss.  Basin,  433;  Ogg,  Opening  of  the  Miss.,  301. 

u  Bouquet  to  Amherst,  December  I,  1763,  Can.  Arch.,  series  A,  vol.  4, 
p.  443;  Gage  to  Bouquet,  December  22,  1763,  ibid.,  vol.  8,  p.  341. 
Early  in  February,  1 764,  Captain  George  Johnston  arrived  at  Pensacola 
with  a  detachment  of  troops.  On  February  24th  he  despatched  Loftus 
to  take  possession  of  Fort  de  Chartres,  A.lbach,  Annals  of  the  West,  88. 

15  Lieutenant-Colonel  Robertson  to  Gage,  March  8,  1764,  Bancroft 
Coll.,  Eng.  and  Am.,  1764-1765;  de  Villiers  du  Terrage,  Les  dernieres 
Annees  de  la  Louisiane  franfaise,  180. 

16 Robertson  to  Gage,  March  8,  1764,  Bancroft  Coll.,  Eng.  and  Am., 
1764-1765.  ™  Ibid. 

18  Loftus  to  Gage,  April  9,  1764,  ibid.  ;  Gage  to  Halifax,  May  21, 
1764,  ibid.;  Parkman,  Conspiracy  of  Pontiac,  II,  283,  285;  Kings- 


OCCUPATION  33 

dred  and  forty  miles  above  New  Orleans.  After  the  loss  of 
several  men  in  the  boats  composing  the  vanguard  Loftus 
ordered  a  retreat  and  the  expedition  was  abandoned.  De- 
pleted by  sickness,  death,  and  desertion  the  regiment  made 
its  way  from  New  Orleans  back  to  Mobile. 19 

Major  Loftus  placed  the  blame  for  the  failure  of  his  expe- 
dition upon  Governor  d'Abbadie  and  other  French  officials 
at  New  Orleans.20  There  is  probably  sufficient  evidence, 
however,  to  warrant  the  conclusion  that  his  accusations 
against  the  governor  were  without  foundation.  The  corre- 
spondence of  d'Abbadie,  Gage,  and  others  indicates  that 
official  aid  was  given  the  English  in  making  their  prepara- 
tions for  the  journey, 21  and  letters  were  issued  to  the  com- 
mandants of  the  French  posts  on  the  Mississippi  to  render 
the  English  convoys  all  the  assistance  in  their  power.22 

ford,  Hist,  of  Can.,  V,  69-74;  Winsor,  Narr.  and  Crit.  Hist,  of  Am,, 
VI,  701,  702;  Gayarr6,  Louisiana,  II,  102-103.  See  map,  "Course 
of  the  Mississippi  River",  by  Lieutenant  Ross,  London,  1772,  showing 
where  Loftus'  force  was  driven  back.  A  section  of  this  map  is  repro- 
duced in  Winsor,  Miss.  Basin,  450. 

19Loftus  to  Gage,  April  9,  1764,  Bancroft  Coll.,  Eng.  and  Am., 
1764-1765;  de  Villiers  du  Terrage,  Les  dernier es  Annees  de  la  Loui- 
siane  frangaise,  182-184;  Claiborne,  Hist,  of  Miss.,  I,  104-105. 

20 Loftus  to  Gage,  April  9,  1764,  Bancroft  Coll.,  Eng.  and  Am., 
1764-1765. 

21  Robertson  to  Gage,  March  8,  1764,  Bancroft  Coll.,  Eng.  and  Am., 
1764-1765;    "Account  of  what  happened  in  Illinois  when  the  English 
attempted  to  take  possession   of  it  by  way  of  the  Mississippi",  in 
Archives  of  the  Ministry  of  the  Colonies,  summarized  in   Can.  Arch. 
Report,  1905,  I,  470-471;   Parkman,  Conspiracy  of  Pontiac,  II,  284, 
n.  i,  containing  a  letter  from  Gage  thanking  d'Abbadie  for  his  efforts 
in  behalf  of  the  English. 

22  Summary  of  the  correspondence  of  d'Abbadie   with  the  French 
commandants,  January,  1764,  Can.  Arch.  Report,  1905, 1,  471.     Park- 
man, who  made  a  careful  study  of  the  correspondence  in  the   French 
archives,  came  to  the  conclusion  that  the  French  officials  may  be  ex- 
onerated.    Winsor  holds  a  similar  view,  Miss.  Basin,  452.     See  also 
Gayarre,   Louisiana,   II,  101.    Kingsford,  Hist,   of  Can.,  V,  69-74, 
places  no   dependence,  however,  in  d'Abbadie's  statements.     On  the 
other  hand  he  bases  most  of  his  argument  upon  a  letter  of  Loftus  which 


34  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

There  may  have  been  some  justification  for  the  suspicion  of 
Loftus  that  intrigues  were  at  work,  for  the  French  as  a 
whole  were  not  in  sympathy  with  the  attempt,  and  the  suc- 
cess of  the  English  would  mean  the  cessation  of  the  lucra- 
tive trade  between  New  Orleans  and  Illinois.  They  were 
no  doubt  delighted  at  the  discomfiture  of  the  English  officer, 
for  when  some  of  the  chiefs  engaged  in  the  ambuscade 
entered  New  Orleans  they  are  said  to  have  been  publicly 
received.23 

Granting,  however,  the  machinations  of  the  French,  the 
chief  reason  for  the  failure  of  Loftus  may  be  found  in  the 
absence  of  precautions  before  undertaking  the  journey. 
Governor  d'Abbadie  had  given  the  English  officer  warning 
of  the  bad  disposition  of  a  number  of  tribes  along  the  Mis- 
sissippi River ,  among  whom  Pontiac  had  considerable  in- 
fluence ,  and  had  assured  him  that  unless  he  carried  presents 
to  the  Indians,  he  would  be  unable  to  proceed  far  up  the 
river.  u  The  policy  of  sending  advance  agents  with  con- 
voys of  presents  for  the  Indians  was  successful  the  follow- 
ing year  when  the  Illinois  posts  were  finally  reached  from 
the  east,  but  no  such  policy  was  adopted  at  this  time.25 
No  action  was  taken  to  counteract  any  possible  intrigues 
on  the  part  of  the  French;  d'Abbadie's  advice  was  not 
heeded,  and  his  prophecy  was  fulfilled.  General  Gage,  in 
his  official  correspondence  relative  to  a  second  attempt, 
implied  that  he  did  not  think  sufficient  care  had  been  exer- 

he  quotes  at  length,  but  gives  no  hint  as  to  its  location,  date,  etc.  It 
is  evidently  not  the  letter  written  to  Gage,  which  is  quoted  above. 

23 Loftus  to  Gage,  April  9,  1764,  Bancroft  Coll.,  Eng.  and  Am., 
1764-1765. 

"Gage  to  Halifax,  April  14,  1764,  N.  Y.  Col.  Docs.,  VII,  619. 

JSThis  has  reference  to  those  tribes  along  the  Mississippi  River  who 
were  in  direct  communication  with  Pontiac  and  the  French.  The  great 
Cherokee  and  Chickasaw  nations  were  favorable  to  the  English. 


OCCUPATION  35 

cised  to  insure  success,  and  expressed  his  belief  that  if  Lof- 
tus  would  make  use  of  the  ' '  necessary  precautions ' '  he 
might  reach  the  mouth  of  the  Ohio  with  little  interruption.  M 
This  want  of  judgment,  therefore,  accounts  in  a  large  de- 
gree for  the  unfortunate  termination  of  the  plans  for  an 
approach  from  the  south. 

The  news  of  the  defeat  of  Loftus  had  two  results.  First, 
it  gave  Pontiac  renewed  hope  that  he  might  be  able  to  rally 
again  the  western  and  northern  Indians,  and,  with  French 
assistance ,  block  the  advance  of  the  English.  In  the  second 
place  it  led  General  Gage  to  determine  upon  an  advance 
from  the  east,  down  the  Ohio  River,  which  was  made  prac- 
ticable by  the  recent  submission  of  the  Shawnee  and  Dela- 
ware Indians. 

Meanwhile  the  Illinois  country  in  1764  presented  an 
anomalous  situation.  St.  Ange  was  governing,  in  the  name 
of  Louis  XV,  a  country  belonging  to  another  king.  Al- 
though he  was  under  orders  to  surrender  the  place  as  soon 
as  possible  to  its  rightful  owner,  the  prospect  of  such  sur- 
render seemed  remote.  He  was  not  only  surrounded  by 
crowds  of  begging,  thieving  savages,  but  was  also  being  con- 
stantly petitioned  by  the  emissaries  of  Pontiac  for  his  active 
support  against  the  approaching  English.  A  considerable 
portion  of  the  French  traders  of  the  villages  were  secretly, 
and  sometimes  openly,  supporting  the  Indian  cause,  which 
added  greatly  to  the  increasing  embarrassment  of  the  com- 
mandant. So  distressing  was  the  situation  in  1764  that 
Neyon  de  Villiers,  St.  Ange's  predecessor,  had  called  the 
latter  from  Vincennes  on  the  Wabash  to  Fort  de  Chartres 

Z6Gage  to  Bouquet,  May  21,  1764,  Can.  Arch.,  series  A,  vol.  8,  p. 
393;  Gage  to  Halifax,  May  21,  1764,  Bancroft  Coll.,  Eng.  and  Am., 
1764-1765;  Gage  to  Haldimand,  May  27,  1764,  Brit.  Mus.,  Add. 
MSS.,  21,  662;  Gage  to  Halifax,  July  13,  1764,  Bancroft  Coll.,  Eng. 
and  Am.,  1764-1765. 


36  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

and  left  the  country  in  disgust,  taking  with  him  to  New 
Orleans  sixty  soldiers  and  eighty  of  the  French  inhabitants. n 
He  had  shortly  before  indignantly  refused  to  countenance 
the  proposals  of  Pontiac,  and  had  begged  the  Indians  to 
lay  down  their  arms  and  make  peace  with  the  English.  'K 

The  news  of  Loftus'  defeat  aroused  in  Pontiac  the  thought 
of  meeting  and  repelling  the  advance  from  the  east  as  it  had 
been  met  and  repelled  in  the  south.  In  spite  of  the  news 
of  the  defeat  of  his  allies  by  Bouquet  and  the  report  that 
preparations  were  being  made  by  his  victorious  enemy  to 
advance  against  him,  Pontiac  determined  to  make  a  supreme 
effort.  By  a  series  of  visits  among  the  tribes  dwelling  in 
the  Illinois  country,  on  the  Wabash,  and  in  the  Miami  coun- 
try, he  succeeded  in  arousing  in  them  the  instinct  of  self- 
preservation,  in  firing  the  hearts  of  all  the  faltering  Indians, 
and  in  winning  the  promise  of  their  cooperation  in  his  plan 
of  defense.  It  was  under  these  circumstances  that  he  met 
and  turned  back  Captain  Thomas  Morris  in  the  Miami 
country  early  in  the  autumn  of  1764.  Morris  had  been 
sent  by  Bradstreet,  who  was  at  this  time  engaged  in  his 
campaign  against  the  northern  Indians,  from  the  neighbor- 
hood of  Detroit  with  messages  to  St.  Ange  in  the  Illinois 
country,  whence  he  was  to  proceed  to  New  Orleans. 29  After 

27  Parkman,  Conspiracy  of  Pontiac,  II,  275;   Winsor,  Miss.  Basin, 
454- 

28  St.  Ange  to  d'Abbadie,  August  16,  1764,  Can.  Arch.  Report,  1905, 
I,  471;   Parkman,  Conspiracy  of  Pontiac,  II,  279-280. 

29  The  original  journal  kept  by  Morris  during  this  journey  is  reprinted 
in  Thwaites,  Early    Western    Travels,  I,  298-328.     There  is  also  a 
biographical  sketch  in  the  same  volume.     See  account   by  Henry  C. 
Van  Schaack,  "  Captain  Thomas  Morris  in  the  Illinois  Country  ",  Mag. 
of  Am.  Hist.,  VIII,  Pt.  2,  pp.  470-479.     Correspondence  relating  to 
the  Morris  mission  is  to  be  found  in  the  Bouquet  Collection,  Can.  Arch., 
series  A,  vol.  8,  pp.  475-491.     For  good  accounts  of  the  incident,  see 
Parkman,  Conspiracy  of  Pontiac,  II,  198-208,  and  Kingsford,  Hist,  of 
Can.,  V,  8. 


OCCUPATION  37 

being  maltreated  and  threatened  with  the  stake  Morris  ef- 
fected an  escape  and  made  his  way  to  Detroit. 30  It  was 
during  his  interview  with  Pontiac  that  the  latter  informed 
him  of  the  repulse  of  Loftus,  of  the  journey  of  his  own  emis- 
saries to  New  Orleans  to  seek  French  support,  and  of  the 
determination  of  the  Indians  to  resist  the  English  to  the 
last. 31 

A  few  months  later,  in  February,  1765,  there  arrived  at 
Fort  de  Chartres  an  English  officer,  John  Ross,  accom- 
panied by  a  trader  named  Crawford.  They  were  probably 
the  first  Englishmen  to  penetrate  thus  far  into  the  former 
French  territory  since  the  beginning  of  the  war. 32  They 
had  been  sent  from  Mobile  by  Major  Farmer,  the  com- 
mandant at  that  place,  to  bring  about  the  conciliation  of 
the  Indians  in  the  Illinois  country. 33  Instead  of  following 
the  Mississippi  they  worked  their  way  northward  through 
the  great  Choctaw  and  Chickasaw  nations  to  the  Ohio,  de- 
scended the  latter  to  the  Mississippi  and  proceeded  thence 
to  the  Illinois  villages. 3*  Although  St.  Ange  received  them 
cordially 35  and  did  all  in  his  power  to  influence  the  savages 
to  receive  the  English,36  the  mission  of  Ross  was  a  failure. 
The  western  Indians  had  nothing  but  expressions  of  hatred 

30  This  incident  illustrates  the  practical  failure  of  Bradstreet's  cam- 
paign against  the  Indians  in  the  lake  region.     While  he  retook  the 
posts,  his  terms  were  so  easy  that  the  Indians  were  not  in  the  least  awed 
by  the  proximity  of  his  army. 

31  Thwaites,  Early  Western  Travels,  I,  305. 

82  Ross  to  Farmer,  February  21,  1765,  Bancroft  Coll.,  Eng.  and  Am., 
1764-1765;  Gage  to  Halifax,  August  10,  1765,  ibid. 

3SRoss  to  Farmer,  May  25,  1765,  Bancroft  Coll.,  Eng.  and  Am., 
1764-1765;  H.  Gordon  to  Johnson,  August  10,  1765,  Johnson  MSS., 
vol.  XI,  no.  73. 

"Ross  to  Farmer,  May  25,  1765,  Bancroft  Coll.,  Eng.  and  Am., 
1764-1765. 

35 Ross  to  Farmer,  May  25,  1765,  Bancroft  Coll.,  Eng.  and  Am., 
1764-1765.  **Ibid. 


38  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

and  defiance  for  the  English  \  even  the  Missouri  and  Osages 
from  beyond  the  Mississippi  had  fallen  under  the  influence 
of  Pontiac.37  Ross  and  his  companion  remained  with  St. 
Ange  nearly  two  months,  but  about  the  middle  of  April 
were  obliged  to  go  down  the  river  to  New  Orleans.  M 

During  the  winter  of  1764—1765  preparations  were  made 
to  send  a  detachment  of  troops  down  the  Ohio  from  Fort 
Pitt  to  relieve  Fort  de  Chartres.  To  pave  the  way  for  the 
troops  two  agents  were  despatched  in  advance.  Sir  Wil- 
liam Johnson  selected  his  deputy,  George  Croghan,  for  the 
delicate  and  dangerous  task  of  going  among  the  Indians  of 
that  country  to  assure  them  of  the  peaceful  attitude  of  the 
English,  to  promise  them  better  facilities  for  trade,  and  to 
accompany  the  promise  with  substantial  presents.39  The 
second  agent  was  Lieutenant  Fraser, 40  whose  mission  was  to 
carry  letters  from  General  Gage  to  the  French  commandant 

37 Ibid,;  "Copy  of  Council  held  at  the  Illinois  in  April,  1765",  P. 
R.  O.,  Home  Office  Papers,  Dom.,  Geo.  Ill,  vol.  3,  no.  4  (l);  copy 
of  minutes  of  council,  April  4,  1765,  summarized  in  Can.  Arch.  Report, 
1905,  I,  473.  See  also  de  Villiers  du  Terrage,  Les  dernieres  Anntes 
de  la  Louisiane  franfaise,  220. 

38 Ross  to  Farmer,  May  25,  1765,  Bancroft  Coll.,  Eng.  and  Am., 
1764-1765. 

89  Johnson  to  Gage,  June  9,  1 764,  Johnson  MSS. ,  vol.  XIX,  no.  1 1 1 ; 
Johnson  to  Lords  of  Trade,  December  26,  1764,  N.  Y.  Col.  Docs., 
VII,  689;  Bouquet  to  Gage,  January  5,  1765,  Can.  Arch.,  series  A, 
vol.  7,  p  in;  Parkman,  Conspiracy  of  Pontiac,  II,  291-292;  Winsor, 
Narr.  and  Crit.  Hist,  of  Am.,  VI,  702.  Croghan  is  one  of  the  most 
interesting  figures  of  the  period.  He  had  charge,  as  Sir  William  John- 
son's deputy,  of  the  Indians  in  the  Ohio  River  region,  and  was  thor- 
oughly conversant  with  western  affairs.  For  biographical  sketch,  see 
Thwaites,  Early  Western  Travels,  I,  47-52,  or  N.  Y.  Col.  Docs., 
VII,  690. 

40  Gage  to  Bouquet,  December  24,  1764,  Can.  Arch.,  series  A,  vols 
8,  p.  499;  same  to  same,  December  30,  1764,  ibid.  This  distinction  i- 
not  generally  made.  Writers  have  usually  inferred  that  Fraser  accom. 
panied  Croghan  in  an  unofficial  capacity.  See  however,  Winsor,  Miss. 
Basin,  456.  Ogg,  Opening  of  the  Miss.,  310,  places  Fraser's  journey 
a  year  previous  to  Croghan's,  which  is  obviously  an  error. 


OCCUPATION 


39 


and  a  proclamation  for  the  inhabitants. 41  January  24 ,  1765, 
Fraser  and  Croghan  set  out  from  Carlisle,  Pennsylvania,42 
followed  a  few  days  later  by  a  large  convoy  of  presents.  4S 
During  the  journey  the  convoy  was  attacked  by  a  band  of 
Pennsylvania  borderers,4*  and  a  large  part  of  the  goods 
destined  for  the  Indians  was  destroyed  45  together  with  some 
valuable  stores  which  certain  Philadelphia  merchants  were 
forwarding  to  Fort  Pitt  for  the  purpose  of  opening  up  the 
trade  as  early  as  possible.46  Croghan  found  it  necessary 
therefore  to  tarry  at  Fort  Pitt  to  replenish  his  stores  and  to 
await  the  opening  of  spring.47  Another  matter,  however, 
intervened  which  forced  him  to  postpone  his  departure  for 
more  than  two  months.  A  temporary  defection  had  arisen 
among  the  Shawnee  and  Delaware  Indians. 48  They  had 
failed  to  fulfill  some  of  the  obligations  imposed  upon  them 
by  Bouquet  in  the  previous  summer,  and  there  was  some 
fear  lest  they  might  not  permit  Croghan  to  pass  through 
their  country.  His  influence  was  such  however,  that  in 
an  assembly  of  the  tribes  at  Fort  Pitt  he  not  only  received 
their  consent  to  a  safe  passage,  but  some  of  their  number 
volunteered  to  accompany  him. 49 

41  Gage  to  Johnson,  February  2,  1765,  Parkman  Coll.  (Mass.  Hist. 
Soc.),  Pontiac-Miscell. ,  1765-1778. 

"Jos.  Galloway  to  B.  Franklin,  January  23,  1765,  Sparks  MSS., 
XVI,  54,  55. 

43  Parkman,  Conspiracy  of  Pontiac ,  II,  292. 

44  The   frontiersmen    could   not  understand   the  significance  of  the 
movement  and  were  incensed  at  the  idea  of  giving  valuable  presents  to 
the  Indians. 

45  Johnson  to  Lords  of  Trade,  May  24,  1765,  N.  Y.  Col.  Docs.,  VII, 
716;   Parkman,  Conspiracy  of  Pontiac,  II,  292-297. 

46  Johnson  to  Lords  of  Trade,  May  24,  1765,  N.  Y.  Col.  Docs.,  VII, 
716. 

47  Parkman,  Conspiracy  of  Pontiac,  II,  297. 

48 Johnson  to  Lords  of  Trade,  January  16,  1765,  N.  Y.  Col.  Does., 
VII,  694. 

4*Croghan's  "Journal  of  transactions",  February  28  to  May   12, 


40  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

Meantime  Lieutenant  Fraser,  Croghan's  companion,  de- 
cided to  proceed  alone,  inasmuch  as  Gage's  instructions  to 
him  were  to  be  at  the  Illinois  country  early  in  April. 50  On 
March  23  he  departed,  accompanied  by  two  or  three  whites 
and  a  couple  of  Indians,51  and  reached  the  Illinois  posts  in 
the  latter  part  of  April,  shortly  after  the  departure  of  Lieu- 
tenant Ross  and  his  party.  Here  Fraser  found  many  of 
the  Indians  in  destitution  and  some  inclined  for  peace.  & 
Nevertheless,  instigated  by  the  traders  and  encouraged  by 
secret  presents,  the  savages  as  a  whole  would  not  listen  to 
him.  He  was  thrown  into  prison,  his  life  threatened,  and 
was  finally  saved  only  by  the  intervention  of  Pontiac  him- 
self. M  Fraser,  feeling  himself  to  be  in  a  dangerous  situa- 
tion, unable  to  hear  from  Croghan,  whom  he  was  daily  ex- 

1765,  MS.  in  Parkman  Coll.;  Johnson  to  Burton,  June  6,  1765,  John- 
son MSS. ,  vol.  X,  no.  263.  Johnson  had  expected  Croghan  to  meet 
Pontiac  at  Fort  Pitt,  but  in  this  he  was  disappointed.  Johnson  to 
Lords  of  Trade,  May  24,  1765,  JV.  Y.  Col.  Docs.,  VII,  716. 

50 Croghan's  "Journal  of  transactions",  February  28  to  May  12, 
1765,  MS.  in  Parkman  Coll. 

51  Maissonville,  a  Frenchman,  and  one  Andrew,  an  interpreter,  were 
among  the  whites.     Shawnee  and  Seneca  Indians  also  accompanied 
the  party.     Note  the  error  in  Kingsford,  Hist,  of  Can.,  V,  116,  and  in 
Wallace,  Illinois  and  Louisiana  under  French  Rule,  354,  wherein 
Sinnott  is  said   to  have  accompanied   Fraser.     Sinnott  had  been  sent 
about  the  same  time  from  the  south  by  Indian  agent  Stuart.     On  ar- 
riving at  the  Illinois  his  goods  were  plundered  and  he  was  finally  forced 
to  flee  to  New  Orleans.     Johnson  to  Lords  of  Trade,  September  28, 
1765,  N.  Y.  Col.  Docs.,  VII,  765;  same  to  same,  November  16,  1765, 
ibid.,  776.      Apparently  Sinnott   must   have   arrived   at   Illinois  after 
Fraser's  departure  for  New  Orleans,  since  Croghan  implies  that  Sinnott 
was  still  at   Fort  de  Chartres  during  his  own  captivity  at  Vincennes. 
See  Croghan's  "Journal  and  transactions",  May  15  to  September  25, 
1765,  as  printed  in  N.  Y.  Col.  Docs.,  VII,  780. 

52  Parkman,  Conspiracy  of  Pontiac,  II,  300. 

53  Fraser  to   Gage,  May  15,   1765,  Bancroft  Coll. ,  Eng.  and  Am., 
1764-1765;   Fraser  to  Crawford,  May  20,  1765,  Mick.  Pioneer  and 
hist.  Colls.,  X,  216-218;    Fraser  to  Gage,  May  26,   1765,  Bancroft 
Coll.,  Eng.  and  Am.,  1764-1765;   Gage  to  Johnson,  August  12,  1765, 
Parkman  Coll.,  Pontiac-Miscell.,  1765-1778. 


OCCUPATION  41 

pecting,  and  frequently  insulted  and  maltreated  by  the 
drunken  savages ,  took  advantage  of  his  discretionary  orders 
and  descended  the  Mississippi  toward  New  Orleans. 5*  Al- 
though the  French  traders  continued  to  supply  the  Indians 
with  arms  and  ammunition,  and  to  buoy  up  their  spirits  by 
stories  of  aid  from  the  king  of  France ,  Pontiac  himself  was 
being  rapidly  disillusioned.  He  had  given  Fraser  the  as- 
surance that  if  the  Indians  on  the  Ohio  had  made  a  per- 
manent peace  he  would  do  likewise. 55  St.  Ange  continued 
to  refuse  the  expected  help , 56  so  that  when  the  news  came 
of  the  failure  of  the  mission  to  New  Orleans  and  of  the 
transfer  of  Louisiana  to  Spain,  the  ruin  of  the  Indian  cause 
was  complete. 

Having  adjusted  affairs  with  the  Indians  at  Fort  Pitt, 
Croghan  set  out  from  there  on  May  i5th  with  two  boats, 
accompanied  by  several  white  companions  and  a  party  of 
Shawnee  Indians. 57  In  compliance  with  messages  from 
Croghan,  representatives  from  numerous  tribes  along  the 
route  met  him  at  the  mouth  of  the  Scioto  and  delivered  up 
a  number  of  French  traders  who  were  compelled  to  take  an 
oath  of  allegiance  to  the  English  crown ,  or  pass  to  the  west 

"Fraser  to  Gage,  June  16,  1765,  Bancroft  Coll.,  Eng.  and  Am., 
1764-1765;  Parkman,  Conspiracy  of  Pontiac,  II,  302;  de  Villiers  du 
Terrage,  Les  dernieres  Annies  de  la  Louisiana  frangaise,  220-221. 
Reports  were  current  in  the  East  that  Fraser  and  his  party  were  killed 
by  Indians.  See  Gage  to  Johnson,  June  17,  1765,  Myers  Coll.  (Lenox 
Library);  Johnson  to  Lords  of  Trade,  July,  1765,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol. 
XI,  no.  43.  One  of  the  party,  Maissonville,  remained  in  Illinois, 
Thwaites,  Early  Western  Travels,  I,  146.  Fraser  accompanied 
Farmer  back  to  Fort  de  Chartres  later  in  the  year,  Fraser  to  Gage, 
December  16,  I765,|B.  T.Papers  (Hist.  Soc.  Pa.),  vol.  XX. 

55  Fraser  to  Campbell,  May  20,  1765,  Mich.  Pioneer  and  Hist.  Colls., 
X,  216-218. 

56  St.  Ange  to  d'Abbadie,  Can.  Arch.  Report,  1905,  I,  471. 

57  A  party  of  traders  headed  by  one  Crawford  preceded  Croghan. 
They  were,   however,   cut  off    before  reaching   the    Illinois   country. 
Shuckburgh  to  Johnson,  July  25,  1765,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol.  XI,  no.  56. 


42  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

of  the  Mississippi. 58  The  only  other  incident  of  import- 
ance on  this  voyage  was  an  attack  by  the  Kickapoos  and 
Mascoutin  Indians  near  the  mouth  of  the  Wabash  on  June 
8th,59  which  contributed  greatly  to  the  success  of  the  mis- 
sion. After  the  attack,  in  which  two  whites  and  several 
Shawnees  were  killed,  the  assailants  expressed  their  profound 
sorrow,  declaring  that  they  thought  the  party  to  be  a  band 
of  Cherokees  with  whom  they  were  at  enmity.  ^  Neverthe- 
less, they  plundered  the  stores  and  carried  Croghan  and  the 
remainder  of  the  party  to  Vincennes,  a  small  French  town 
on  the  Wabash.  Croghan  was  now  separated  temporarily 
from  his  companions  and  carried  to  Fort  Ouiatanon,  about 
two  hundred  and  ten  miles  north  of  Vincennes.  The  poli- 
tical blunder  of  the  Kickapoos  in  firing  upon  the  convoy 
now  became  apparent ; 61  they  were  censured  on  all  sides  for 
having  attacked  their  friends,  the  Shawnees,  since  the  latter 
might  thus  be  turned  into  deadly  enemies. 62  During  the 
first  week  of  July  deputations  from  all  the  surrounding  tribes 
visited  Croghan,  assuring  him  of  their  desire  for  peace  and 
of  their  willingness  to  escort  him  to  the  Illinois  country 

^Croghan's  journal  in  Thwaites,  Early  Western  Travels,  I,  131; 
Parkman,  Conspiracy  of  Pontiac,  II,  304.  The  chief  sources  of  in- 
formation for  this  journey  are  Croghan 's  journals,  most  of  which  have 
been  printed  in  Thwaites,  Early  Western  Travels,  I,  126-166.  For 
good  secondary  accounts  see  Parkman,  Conspiracy  of  Pontiac,  II,  304- 
315;  Kingsford,  Hist,  of  Can  ,  V,  116-120;  Winsor,  Narr.  and  Crit. 
Hist,  of  Am.,  VI,  704;  Winsor,  Miss.  Basin,  456-457. 

S9Croghan's  journal,  in  Thwaites,  Early  Western  Travels,  I,  131; 
Gage  to  Conway,  September  23,  1765,  Bancroft  Coll.,  Eng.  and  Am., 
1764-1765. 

^Croghan's  journal,  in  Thwaites,  Early  Western  Travels,  I,  139. 

61  Croghan  to  Murray,  July  12,  1765,  Bancroft  Coll.,  Eng.  and  Am., 
1764-1765;  Gage  to  Conway,  September  23,  1765,  ibid. 

62 Croghan  to  Murray,  July  12,  1765,  Bancroft  Coll.,  ling,  and  Am., 
1764-1765;  Croghan 's  journal,  in  Thwaites,  Early  Western  Travels, 
I,  146. 


OCCUPATION  43 

where  Pontiac  was  residing.68  July  nth,  Maissonville , 
whom  Fraser  had  a  few  weeks  before  left  at  Fort  de  Char- 
tres, arrived  at  Ouiatanon  with  messages  from  St.  Ange  re- 
questing Croghan  to  come  to  Fort  de  Chartres  to  arrange 
affairs  in  that  region. 6I  A  few  days  later  Croghan  set  out 
for  the  Illinois  country,  attended  by  a  large  concourse  of 
savages,  but  had  advanced  only  a  short  distance  when  he 
met  Pontiac  himself  who  was  on  the  road  to  Ouiatanon. 
They  all  returned  to  the  fort  where,  at  a  great  council,  Pont- 
iac signified  his  willingness  to  make  a  lasting  peace  and 
promised  to  offer  no  further  resistance  to  the  approach  of 
the  English  troops. 65  There  was  now  no  need  to  go  to  Fort 
de  Chartres ;  instead  Croghan  turned  his  steps  toward  De- 
troit, where  late  in  the  summer  of  1765,  another  important 
Indian  conference  was  held  in  which  a  general  peace  was 
made  with  all  the  western  Indians. 66 

Immediately  after  effecting  an  accommodation  with  Pont- 
iac at  Ouiatanon,  Croghan  sent  an  account  of  the  success 
of  his  negotiations  to  Fort  Pitt, "  where  Captain  Sterling 

63 Croghan  to  Murray,  July  12,  1765,  Bancroft  Coll.,  Eng.  and  Am., 
1764-1765;  Croghan's  journal,  in  Thwaites,  Early  Western  Travels, 
I,  144-145;  Johnson  to  Lords  of  Trade,  July,  1765,  Johnson  MSS., 
vol.  XI,  no.  43. 

64 Croghan's  journal,  in  Thwaites,  Early  Western  Travels,  I,  145- 
146. 

65 Croghan's  journal,  in  Thwaites,  Early  Western  Travels,  I,  145- 
146;  Jas.  Macdonald  to  Johnson,  July  24,  1765,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol. 
XI,  no.  50;  Thos.  Hutchins  to  Johnson,  August  31,  1765,  ibid.  no.  97; 
Gage  to  Conway,  September  23,  1765,  Bancroft  Coll.,  Eng.  and  Am., 
1764-1765. 

^Croghan's  journal,  in  Thwaites,  Early  Western  Travels,  I,  154— 
166;  Johnson  to  Wallace,  September  18,  1765,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol. 
XI,  no.  56;  Gage  to  Conway,  September  23,  1765,  Bancroft  Coll., 
Kng.  and  Am.,  1764-1765;  Johnson  to  Lords  of  Trade,  September 
28,  1765,  N.  Y.  Col.  Docs.,\ll,  766;  Gage  to  Conway,  November  9, 
1765,  Bancroft  Coll.,  Eng.  and  Am.,  1764-1765.  The  editor  of  the 
N.  Y.  Col.  Docs.,  VII,  982,  says  that  Croghan  went  to  Fort  de 
Chartres,  which  is  erroneous. 

67  Gage  to  Conway,  September  23,  1765,  Bancroft  Coll.,  Eng.  and 


44  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

with  a  detachment  of  about  one  hundred  men  of  the  Forty  - 
second  or  Black  Watch  Regiment,  had  been  holding  him- 
self in  readiness  for  some  time ,  waiting  for  a  favorable  re- 
port before  moving  to  the  relief  of  Fort  de  Chartres.  Al- 
though the  Thirty-fourth  Regiment  under  Major  Farmer 
was  supposed  to  be  making  its  way  up  the  Mississippi  to 
relieve  the  French  garrison  in  Illinois,  General  Gage  would 
not  depend  upon  its  slow  and  uncertain  movements. 68 
Upon  receipt  of  the  news  from  Croghan,  on  the  24th  of 
August  Sterling  left  Fort  Pitt 69  and  began  the  long  and  te- 
dious journey.  Owing  to  the  season  of  the  year  the  navi- 
gation of  the  Ohio  was  very  difficult,  forty-seven  days  being 
required  to  complete  the  journey. 70  The  voyage  on  the 
whole  was  without  incident  until  about  forty  miles  below  the 
Wabash  River.  Here  Sterling's  force  encountered  two  boats 
loaded  with  goods,  in  charge  of  a  French  trader,  and  accom- 
panied by  some  thirty  Indians  and  a  chief  of  the  Shawnees, 
who  had  remained  in  the  French  interest. 7I  On  account  of 
the  allegations  of  a  certain  Indian  that  his  party  had  planned 
to  fire  on  the  English  before  they  were  aware  of  the  latter's 
strength,  Sterling  became  apprehensive  lest  the  attitude  of 
the  Indians  had  changed  since  Croghan's  visit.  He  there- 
fore sent  Lieutenant  Rumsey,  with  a  small  party,  by  land 
from  Fort  Massac  to  Fort  de  Chartres,  in  order  to  ascertain 

Am.,  1764-1765;  Johnson  to  Wallace,  September  18,  1765,  Johnson 
MSS.,  vol.  XI,  no.  56;  Johnson  to  Lords  of  Trade,  September  28, 
1765.  N.  Y.  Col.  Docs.,  VII,  766. 

68 Gage  to  Conway,  September  23,  1765,  Bancroft  Coll.,  Eng.  and 
Am.,  1764-1765. 

69 Ibid.;  Letter  of  Jas.  Eidington,  October  17,  1765,  P.  R.  O., 
Chatham  Papers,  vol.  97. 

"Sterling  to  Gage,  October  18,  1765,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol. 
122. 
"  Ibid. 


OCCUPATION  45 

the  exact  situation  and  to  apprise  St.  Ange  of  his  approach.72 
Rumsey  and  his  guides,  however,  lost  their  way  and  did 
not  reach  the  villages  until  after  the  arrival  of  the  troops.  73 
Sterling  arrived  on  the  gth  of  October,  M  and  on  the  follow- 
ing day  St.  Ange  and  the  French  garrison  were  formally  re- 
lieved. 75  With  this  event  the  last  vestige  of  French  author- 
ity east  of  the  Mississippi  River  passed  away. 

"Sterling  to  Gage,  October  18,  1765,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol. 
122. 


Sterling  alleged  that  the  Indians  and  French  were  unaware 
of  his  approach  until  he  was  within  a  few  miles  of  the  villages,  and  that 
the  Indians  upon  learning  of  the  weakness  of  the  English  forces,  as- 
sumed a  most  insolent  and  threatening  attitude.  He  further  asserted 
that  although  Croghan  claimed  to  have  made  a  peace  with  all  the 
Illinois  chiefs,  he  is  assured  that  not  one  was  present  at  the  peace  at 
Ouiatanon,  and  that  his  own  sudden  appearance  at  the  villages  was  the 
real  cause  of  his  success.  Sir  William  Johnson,  in  a  letter  to  Croghan, 
February  21,  1766,  casts  doubt  upon  the  representations  of  Sterling. 
He  says  that  it  is  easy  to  account  for  his  motives,  and  that  he  has 
written  General  Gage  fully  upon  the  subject.  The  letter  referred  to  has 
probably  been  destroyed,  at  any  rate  it  is  not  in  any  of  the  large  col- 
lections. Johnson  MSS.,  vol.  XII,  no.  60. 

"Sterling  to  Gage,  October  18,  1765,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol. 
122;  Eidington  to  ---  ,  October  17,  1765,  P.  R.  O.,  Chatham  Papers, 
vol.  97;  Gage  to  Johnson,  December  30,  1765,  MS.  in  Hist.  Soc.  Pa.; 
Gage  to  Barrington,  January  8,  1766,  P.  R.  O.  ,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol. 
122;  Gage  to  Conway,  January  16,  1766,  ibid.;  Johnson  to  Lords  of 
Trade,  January  31,  1766,  N.  Y.  Col.  Docs.,  VII,  808;  Articles  of  sur- 
render, inventory  of  goods,  etc.,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  122. 
These  documents  are  printed  in  Transactions  of  the  111.  State  Hist. 
Soc.  for  1907.  For  secondary  account  of  the  surrender,  see  Stone, 
Life  of  Sir  William  Johnson,  II,  252.  Captain  Sterling  relates  in  his 
letter  to  Gage  that  he  had  considerable  difficulty  in  persuading  St. 
Ange  to  surrender  his  ammunition  and  artillery  stores.  St.  Ange 
claimed  he  had  positive  orders  to  surrender  only  the  fort  and  a  few 
pieces  of  artillery.  Parkman,  Conspiracy  of  Pontiac,  II,  314,  says 
Sterling  arrived  at  Fort  de  Chartres  in  the  early  part  of  winter,  and 
Nicollet,  in  his  sketch  of  St.  Louis,  states  that  the  fort  was  reached  in 
mid-summer.  From  the  references  already  quoted,  however,  there  can 
be  no  doubt  as  to  the  exact  date. 


CHAPTER  IV. 
FIVE  YEARS  OF  DISORDER,  1765-1770. 

WHAT  actual  events  took  place  in  the  Illinois  country 
after  the  English  occupation  has  long  been  problematical. 
Previous  writers,  almost  without  exception,  have  dismissed 
with  a  sentence  the  first  two  or  three  years  of  the  period. 
Indeed,  the  whole  thirteen  years  of  British  administration 
have  generally  been  crowded  into  two  or  three  paragraphs. 
Although  the  available  historical  material  relating  to  the 
field  in  general  has  been  considerably  augmented  ,  gaps  yet 
remain  which  must  be  bridged  before  a  complete  history  of 
the  colony  under  the  British  can  be  written. 

The  first  duty  of  the  British  commandant  after  taking 
formal  possession  of  Fort  de  Chartres  in  October,  1765, 
was  to  announce  to  the  inhabitants  the  contents  of  Gage's 
proclamation,  defining  the  status  of  the  individual  inhabi- 
tants of  Illinois.  One  of  the  leading  features  of  this  docu- 
ment was  a  clause  granting  to  the  French  the  right  of  the 
free  exercise  of  the  Roman  Catholic  religion  "  in  the  same 
manner  as  in  Canada",1  which  was  the  fulfilment  on  the 
part  of  the  British  government  of  the  pledge  given  in  the 
fourth  article  of  the  treaty  of  Paris,  which  contained  the 
following  clause  :  '  <  His  Brittanic  Majesty  agrees  to  grant 
the  liberty  of  the  Catholic  religion  to  the  inhabitants  of 
Canada  ;  he  will  consequently  give  the  most  precise  and 


.  State  Papers^  Pub.  Lands,  II,  209;   Dillon,  Hist,  of  Indiana, 
I,  93-94- 

46 


YEARS  OP  DISORDER  47 

effectual  orders,  that  his  new  Roman  Catholic  subjects  may 
profess  the  worship  of  their  religion,  according  to  the  rites 
of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  as  far  as  the  laws  of  Great 
Britain  permit."  This  provision  appertained  to  the  whole 
western  territory  as  well  as  to  Canada  proper.  Prior  to  the 
treaty  of  cession  the  Illinois  and  Wabash  settlements  were 
subject  to  the  jurisdiction  of  Louisiana,  and  approximately 
the  country  north  of  the  fortieth  parallel  had  been  within, 
the  limits  of  Canada.  But  in  the  treaty  all  the  territory 
lying  between  the  Alleghanies  and  the  Mississippi  River  was 
described  as  a  dependency  of  Canada.  The  government 
was  thus  committed  to  religious  toleration  within  the  whole 
extent  of  the  ceded  territory.  This  meant,  however,  that 
only  the  religious  privileges  of  the  church  had  been  secured, 
for  the  clause  in  the  treaty,  "  as  far  as  the  laws  of  Great 
Britain  permit  ",2  meant  that  the  authority  of  France  would 
not  be  tolerated  within  the  British  empire. 

Other  clauses  provided  that  all  the  inhabitants  of  Illinois 
who  had  been  subjects  of  the  King  of  France ,  might  if  they 
desired,  sell  their  estates  and  retire  with  their  effects  to 
Louisiana.  No  restraint  would  be  placed  on  their  emigra- 
tion, except  for  debt  or  on  account  of  criminal  processes.  * 
This  was  also  a  fulfilment  of  the  pledges  made  in  the  treaty 
of  Paris.  *  All  the  inhabitants  who  desired  to  retain  their 
estates  and  become  subjects  of  Great  Britain  were  guaran- 
teed security  for  their  persons  and  effects,  and  liberty  of 
trade  upon  taking  the  oath  of  allegiance  and  fidelity  to  the 
crown. 5 

When  Captain  Sterling  proceeded  to  Kaskaskia  to  post 

1  Can.  Const.  Docs.,  1759-1791,  75. 

8  Am.  State  Papers,  Pub.  Lands,  II,  209. 

4  Can.  Const.  Docs.,  /7J9-/79/,  75. 

6  Am.  State  Papers,  Pub.  Lands,  II,  209. 


48  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

the  proclamation  and  to  administer  the  oath  of  allegiance 
as  authorized  by  the  commanding  general,  he  was  confronted 
by  an  unexpected  movement  on  the  part  of  the  inhabitants. 
A  petition  was  presented,  signed  by  representative  French- 
men of  the  village,  asking  for  a  respite  of  nine  months  in 
order  that  they  might  settle  their  affairs  and  decide  whether 
they  wished  to  remain  under  the  British  government  or 
withdraw  from  the  country. 6  According  to  treaty  stipula- 
tions the  inhabitants  of  the  ceded  territory  had  been  given 
eighteen  months  in  which  to  retire ,  the  time  to  be  computed 
from  the  date  of  the  exchange  of  ratifications. 7  The  limit 
thus  defined  had  long  since  expired ,  and  it  was  therefore 
beyond  the  legal  competence  of  Sterling  or  of  his  superior, 
General  Gage,  to  grant  an  extension  of  time.  Sterling,  in- 
deed, refused  at  first  to  grant  the  request,8  but  when  he 
perceived  that  unless  some  concessions  were  made  the  vil- 
lage would  be  immediately  depopulated,  he  extended  the 
time  to  the  first  of  March,  1766,"  with  the  stipulations  that 

6  Sterling  to  Gage,  October  18,  1765,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol. 
122.     "Nous  avons  eu  1'honneur  de  faire,  a  cette  Occasion,  nos  justes 
Representations  a  Mr.  Sterling,  et  lui  avons  demande  un  Delai  de  neuf 
Mois,  pour  attendre  que  les  Commercans  Anglais  etant  arrives,  et  la 
Confiance  retablie  avec  le  Commerce,  ceux  d'entre  nous  qui  voudront 
quitter  puissent  tirer  parti  de  leurs  Biens  fonds  et  Maisons."     Petition 
of  the  inhabitants  to  Gage,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  122. 

7  Can.  Const.  Docs. ,  1759-1191,  86. 

8 Sterling  to  Gage,  October  18,  1765,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol. 
122. 

9  Ibid.  "  Comme  il  n'a  pas  cru  pouvoir  prendre  sur  lui  d'accorder 
que  jusqu'au  Mois  de  Mars  prochain,  il  nous  a  promis  d'appuyer 
aupres  de  Votre  Excellence,  la  justice  de  notre  Cause,  ainsi  que  1'Im- 
possibilite  de  rien  vendre  dans  le  Moment  present.  L'entiere  Con- 
fiance  que  nous  avons  en  Sa  Parole,  nous  borne  a  remettre  seulement 
sous  vos  yeux,  que  personne  n'a  pu  prendre  des  arrangements  anterieurs 
a  Parrivee  des  Troupes  Anglaises  dans  ce  PaTs,  que  nous  etions  tous  les 
jours  prets  1'abandonner,  par  les  Violences  des  Sauvages  enhardis  par 
notre  petit  nombre."  Petition  of  inhabitants,  ibid. 


YEARS  OF  DISORDER  49 

a  temporary  oath  of  allegiance  be  taken, 10  and  that  all  de- 
siring to  leave  the  country  should  give  in  their  names  in 
advance.  "  To  this  tentative  proposal  the  French  in  Kas- 
kaskia  agreed  on  condition  that  Sterling  forward  to  the 
commanding  general  a  petition  in  which  they  asked  for  a 
further  extension. 12  An  officer  was  then  despatched  to  the 
villages  of  Prairie  du  Rocher,  St.  Philippe,  and  Cahokia, 
where  similar  arrangements  were  made. l3 

The  machinery  of  government  in  operation  under  the 
French  had  become  so  unsettled  during  the  French  and 
Indian  war  that  when  the  English  troops  entered  the  country 
affairs  were  in  a  chaotic  state.  The  commandant  of  the 
English  troops  had  of  course  no  commission  to  govern  the 
inhabitants,  but  he  found  himself  confronted  with  condi- 
tions which  made  immediate  action  imperative.  Practically 
the  only  civil  officials  Sterling  found  on  the  English  side  of 
the  river  were  Joseph  Lefebvre ,  who  acted  as  judge ,  attorney- 
general,  and  guardian  of  the  royal  warehouse,  and  Joseph 
Labuxiere,  who  was  clerk  and  notary  public. 14  These  men, 
however,  retired  to  St.  Louis  with  St.  Ange  and  the  French 
soldiers  shortly  after  the  arrival  of  the  English. )5  This 
brought  the  whole  governmental  machinery  to  a  standstill, 

10  Sterling  to  Gage,  October  18,  1765,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol. 
122. 

11  Ibid.;   Farmer  to  Gage,  December  19,  1765,  B.  T.  Papers  (Hist. 
Soc.  Pa.),  vol.  XX. 

12 P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  122.  The  petition  is  signed  by 
such  prominent  Frenchmen  as  La  Grange,  who  acted  as  civil  judge 
under  the  British,  Rocheblave,  who  became  the  last  British  command- 
ant in  Illinois,  Bloiiin,  a  wealthy  merchant  and  later  a  prominent  advo- 
cate of  a  civil  government,  J.  B.  Beauvais,  Charleville,  and  others. 
Gage  granted  the  request  without  waiting  for  an  answer  from  London, 
thus  indorsing  the  action  of  his  subordinate.  Gage  to  Conway,  January 
1 6,  1766,  ibid. 

"Sterling  to  Gage,  October  18,  1765,  ibid. 

"Sterling  to  Gage,  December  15,  1765,  ibid.  15 Ibid. 


50  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

and  the  English  commander  was  forced  to  act.  He  de- 
termined to  appoint  a  judge  and  after  consulting  the  princi- 
pal inhabitants  of  the  villages,  selected  La  Grange,  who 
was  intrusted  "  to  decide  all  disputes  according  to  the  Law 
and  Customs  of  the  Country  ' ' ,  with  liberty  of  appeal  to  the 
commandant  in  case  the  litigants  were  dissatisfied  with  his 
decision.  J6  The  captains  of  militia  seem  to  have  retained 
their  positions  under  the  British,  their  duties  being  practi- 
cally the  same  as  in  the  French  regime.  Each  village  or 
parish  had  its  captain  who  saw  to  the  enforcement  of  decrees 
and  other  civil  matters  as  well  as  to  the  organization  of  the 
local  militia.  "  The  office  of  royal  commissary  was  also 
continued  and  James  Rumsey,  a  former  officer  in  the  Eng- 
lish army,  was  appointed  to  this  position.18  But  who  was 
to  continue  the  duties  of  the  old  French  commandant  with 
both  his  civil  and  military  functions?  Obviously  the  most 
logical  person  was  the  commanding  officer  of  the  English 
troops  stationed  at  the  fort,  with  the  difference  that  the 
French  official  held  a  special  commission  for  the  perform- 
ance of  these  duties,  and  the  English  commandant  had  no 
such  authorization.  A  further  and  more  fundamental  differ- 
ence lay  in  the  fact  that  formerly  the  French  had  the  right 
to  appeal  to  the  Superior  Council  at  New  Orleans, 19  while 
apparently  no  such  corresponding  safeguard  was  given  them 
by  the  new  arrangement. 

Sterling  did  not  long  retain  command  of  the  post 20  for  on 

16  Sterling  to  Gage,  December  15,  1765,  ibid. 

"Sterling  to  Gage,  December  15,  1765,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I., 
vol.  122;  Cahokia  Records  (Belleville,  111.),  British  period. 

18 Sterling  to  Gage,  October  18,  1765,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I., 
vol.  122.  19See  above,  ch.  I,  p.  u. 

20Monette,  Hist,  of  Miss.  Valley  (1846),  I,  411,  says  that  "  Capt. 
Stirling  died  in  December;  St.  Ange  returned  to  Fort  Chartres,  and 
not  long  afterward  Major  Frazer,  from  Fort  Pitt,  arrived  as  command- 
ant." The  statement  is  wholly  incorrect.  Sterling  later  served  in  the 


YEARS  OF  DISORDER  5 1 

December  2,  he  was  superseded  by  Major  Robert  Farmer,21 
his  superior  in  rank,  who  arrived  from  Mobile  with  a  de- 
tachment of  the  Thirty-fourth  Regiment,  after  an  eight 
months'  voyage.  T2  Their  arrival  was  exceedingly  welcome 
to  Sterling  and  his  men,  who  were  becoming  greatly  em- 
barrassed for  lack  of  provisions,  ammunition,  and  presents 
for  the  Indians. 23  When  they  left  Fort  Pitt  in  August,  it 
had  not  been  deemed  necessary  to  take  more  than  sixty 
pounds  of  ammunition,  inasmuch  as  Fort  de  Chartres  was 
expected  to  yield  a  sufficient  supply,  and  both  Gage  and 
Sterling  believed  that  Croghan,  with  his  cargo  of  supplies, 

Revolutionary  war,  and  lived  until  1808.  The  "Major  Frazer"  re- 
ferred to  was  doubtless  the  Lieutenant  Fraser  who  preceded  George 
Croghan  to  the  Illinois  country  early  in  1765.  He  never  commanded 
in  Illinois  at  any  time,  nor  is  there  the  slightest  evidence  that  St.  Ange, 
the  last  French  commandant  at  Fort  de  Chartres,  ever  returned.  This 
tradition  of  Sterling's  death  and  of  the  succession  of  Fraser  has  been 
perpetuated  by  Reynolds,  The  Pioneer  Hist,  of  III.  (1852),  55;  Blanch- 
ard,  Hist,  of  III.  (1883),  35;  Billon,  Annals  of  St.  Louis  (1886),  I, 
36;  Dunn,  Hist,  of  Indiana  (1905),  76.  Blanchard,  in  his  Disco-very 
and  Conquest  of  the  Northwest  (1879),  179.  after  repeating  the  story, 
states  that  "  both  Peck  and  Brown  erroneously  give  this  commandant's 
name  as  Farmer.  It  should  be  Fraser,  the  same  who  first  advanced  to 
the  place  from  Fort  Pitt."  For  a  sketch  of  Sterling's  career  see  N.  Y. 
Col.  Docs.y  VII,  786,  or  Diet.  Nat.  Biog. 

21  For  sketch  of  Farmer's  life  see  N.   Y.  Col.  Docs.,  VII,  816. 

22 Farmer  to  Gage,  December  16  and  19,  1765,  B.  T.  Papers  (Hist. 
Soc.  Pa. ),  vol.  XX;  Johnson  to  Lords  of  Trade,  March  22,  1766,  N.  Y. 
Col.  Docs.,  Mil,  816;  Gage  to  Conway,  March  28,  1766,  B.  T.  Papers 
(Hist.  Soc.  Pa.),  vol.  XX;  Campbell  to  Johnson,  March  29,  1766, 
Parkman  Coll.,  Pontiac-Miscell.,  1765-1778;  Farmer  to  Gage,  March 
n,  1765,  P.  R.  O.,  Home  Office  Papers,  vol.  XX,  no.  41.  In  the 
letter  last  cited  Farmer  blames  Governor  Johnstone  of  West  Florida  for 
the  long  delay  in  starting  for  the  Illinois  country  and  for  the  scant  sup- 
ply of  provisions  he  carried.  It  appears  that  Farmer  had  planned  to 
start  early  in  the  spring  of  1765,  and  he  alleges  that  Johnstone  ques- 
tioned his  right  to  take  provisions  from  the  store,  and  insisted  upon  all 
the  officers  and  men  taking  passes  from  himself,  and  in  many  other 
ways  delayed  the  departure  for  several  weeks. 

23  Sterling  to  Gage,  October  18,  1765,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol. 
122;  letter  of  Eidington,  October  17,  1765,  P.  R.  O.,  Chatham 
Papers,  vol.  97. 


52  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

would  be  awaiting  the  arrival  of  the  troops  at  the  fort.  M 
Neither  expectation,  however,  was  realized.  Croghan  was 
back  in  the  colonies  prior  to  Sterling's  arrival  at  the  post, 
and  when  the  fort  was  transferred  it  yielded  neither  am- 
munition nor  any  other  supplies  in  sufficient  quantity  to 
meet  the  needs  of  the  troops. 25 

An  assembly  of  three  or  four  thousand  Indians  had  been 
accustomed  to  gather  at  the  fort  each  spring  to  receive  an- 
nual gifts  from  the  French.  But  the  English  had  made  no 
provision  for  such  a  contingency,  which,  coupled  with  the 
weakness  of  the  garrison  and  the  recent  hostility  of  the 
Indians,  would  probably  lead  to  serious  complications.  A 
probable  defection  of  the  Indians  therefore  necessitated  a 
large  supply  of  military  stores 26  which  it  was  possible  to  ob- 
tain only  from  the  French  merchants  in  the  villages.  The 
latter  agreed  to  furnish  the  soldiers  with  ammunition  on 
condition  that  they  would  also  purchase  other  provisions,27 
for  which,  the  English  allege ,  they  were  charged  an  exorbi- 
tant price. 28  Sterling  was  compelled  to  acquiesce,  for  the 
merchants  had  sent  their  goods  across  the  river  where  he 
could  not  get  at  them. 29 

24 Sterling  to  Gage,  October  18,  1765,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol. 
122;  letter  of  Eidington,  October  17,  1765,  P.  R.  O.,  Chatham  Papers, 
vol.  97.  Nevertheless  in  the  Audit  Office  records  are  two  entries 
wherein  293  pounds  sterling  is  allowed  Sterling  for  presents  to  the  In- 
dians in  the  Illinois  country.  P.  R.  O. ,  Declared  Accounts,  Audit 
Office,  bundle  163,  roll  446. 

"Letter  of  Eidington,  October  17,  1765,  P.  R.  O., Chatham  Papers, 
vcj.  97. 

™Ibid.;  Sterling  to  Gage,  October  18,  1765.  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and 
W.  I.,  vol.  122.  "Ibid.  ™Ibid. 

29  Sterling  to  Gage,  October  18,  1765,  P.  R.  p.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol. 
122.  The  French  afterwards  declared  that  their  reluctance  to  sell  pro- 
visions to  the  English  was  occasioned  by  the  pay  they  received,  which 
was  in  bills  on  London  or  New  York.  These  they  were  obliged  to  sell 
to  the  merchants  of  New  Orleans  from  whom  they  purchased  their 
goods,  at  a  loss  of  fifty  and  sixty  per  cent.  They  were  also  averse  to  any 


YEARS  OF  DISORDER  53 

The  large  supply  of  provisions  which  the  colony  had  pro- 
duced in  former  years  seems  to  have  decreased  ;  at  any  rate 
it  fell  far  short  of  the  expectations  of  the  English  officers. 
One  officer  writes  at  this  time  that  "  they  have  but  little 
here ,  and  are  doing  us  a  vast  favor  when  they  let  us  have  a 
Gallon  of  French  Brandy  at  twenty  Shillings  Sterling  and  as 
the  price  is  not  as  yet  regulated  the  Eatables  is  in  the  same 
proportions."30  The  wealth  of  the  colony  had  been  con- 
siderably impaired  since  the  occupation  on  account  of  the 
exodus  of  a  large  number  of  families  who  disobeyed  the 
order  of  Sterling  that  all  who  desired  to  withdraw  should 
give  in  their  names  in  advance.  Taking  their  cattle,  grain, 
and  effects  across  the  ferries  at  Cahokia  and  Kaskaskia, 
they  found  homes  at  St.  Louis  and  St.  Genevieve  on  the 
Spanish  side. 31  Probably  a  larger  part  of  the  emigrants  left 
in  the  hope  that  in  Louisiana  they  might  still  enjoy  their 
ancient  laws  and  privileges,32  and  others  from  fear  lest  the 
Indians,  who  were  now  assuming  a  threatening  attitude, 
might  destroy  their  crops  and  homes.83 

kind  of  paper  currency,  owing  to  its  bad  management  by  the  French 
government  of  Louisiana  prior  to  1763.  Croghan  to  Gage,  January  12, 
1767,  Johnson  MSS. ,  vol.  XIV,  no  12.  For  an  account  of  tne  paper 
money  issued  during  the  French  regime,  see  Pittman,  Present  State  of 
the  European  Settlements  on  the  Miss.,  ed.  Hodder,  47-48. 

80 Letter  of  Eidington,  October  17,  1765,  P.  R.  O.,  Chatham  Papers, 
vol.  97. 

51  Sterling  to  Gage,  December  15,  1765,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I., 
vol.  122. 

82  Fraser  to  Gage,  December  16,  1765,  B.  T.  Papers  (Hist.  Soc.  Pa.), 
vol.  XX;   Farmer  to  Gage,  December  19,  1765,  ibid.     Fraser  alleged 
that  St.  Ange,  who  acted  as  commandant  at  St.  Louis  after  his  retire- 
ment from   Fort  de  Chartres,  instigated  many  of  the  French  to  cross 
over,  and   that  other  residents  of   the    Spanish    side  endeavored   to 
frighten  the  inhabitants  of  Illinois  by  representing  Major  Farmer  as  a 
rascal  who  would   deprive  them  of  their  former  privileges.     See  also 
Fraser's  "Report   of   an    Exploratory  Survey",  May  4,   1766,  Can. 
Arch.,  series  B,  vol.  26,  p.  24. 

83  Memorial  of  the  inhabitants  to  Gage,  October,   17659  P.  R.  O., 


54  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

The  serious  situation  of  the  garrison  continued  through 
the  winter  and  spring  of  1765  and  i766.34  Farmer  esti- 
mated that  all  the  provisions  available  (barely  enough  to  last 
the  garrison  until  July), 35  amounted  to  no  more  than  50,- 
ooo  pounds  of  flour  and  i  ,250  pounds  of  cornmeal,  a  portion 
of  which  would  have  to  be  given  to  the  Indians  since  repre- 
sentatives of  that  department  had  not  yet  appeared.  These 
circumstances  obliged  Major  Farmer  to  send  Sterling  and 
his  troops  to  New  York  by  way  of  the  Mississippi  River  and 
New  Orleans. 36  In  response  to  a  series  of  urgent  requests 
for  assistance,  Gage  employed  a  force  of  Indians  to  trans- 
port a  cargo  to  Fort  de  Chartres, 37  which  reached  there 

Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  122;  Fraser  to  Gage,  December  16,  1765,  B.  T. 
Papers  (Hist.  Soc.  Pa.),  vol.  XX.  The  movement  across  the  river 
was  considerable  during  the  early  years  of  the  occupation.  In  the 
summer  of  1 765  there  were  approximately  2,000  whites  on  the  English 
side.  Fraser  to  Gage,  May  15,  1765,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol. 
122.  Three  years  later  in  1768  the  approximate  number  was  1,000, 
"  State  of  the  Settlements  in  the  Illinois  Country",  P.  R.  O. ,  Am.  and 
W.  I.,  vol.  125. 

84  Farmer  to  Gage,  December  16  and  19,  1765,  B.  T.  Papers  (Hist. 
Soc.  Pa.),  vol.  XX;  same  to  Barrington,  March  19,  1766,  P.  R.  O. , 
Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  122. 

35  Farmer  to  Gage,  December  16  and  19,  1765,  B.  T.  Papers  (Hist. 
Soc.  Pa, ),  vol.  XX.  Farmer  had  just  received  word  that  Colonel  Reed 
was  on  his  way  from  Mobile  to  the  Illinois  country  with  about  fifty  men 
and  just  enough  provisions  for  the  journey.  Reed  was  expecting  to 
receive  further  supplies  at  Fort  de  Chartres,  ibid. 

38 Farmer  to  Gage,  December  16  and  19,  1765,  B.  T.  Papers  (Hist. 
Soc.  Pa.),  vol.  XX;  Gage  to  Johnson,  June  2,  1766,  Gage's  Letters 
(Harvard  College  Library).  This  was  contrary  to  Gage's  orders,  ibid. 

37 Gage  to  Conway,  June  24,  1766,  P.  R.  O. ,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol. 
122.  "  Soon  after  the  Regiment's  arrival  at  Illinois,  with  the  concur- 
rence of  the  Captains  present  there  was  small  notes  Issued  out,  I  believe 
to  the  amount  of  two  months'  Subsistance  in  order  to  provide  the  men 
with  small  Articles  and  Necessarys,  the  Paymaster  gave  the  Merchants 
and  others  that  brought  in  these  Circulating  Notes,  bills  on  the  Agent 
in  London  for  the  amount  of  them.  And  this  is  all  the  subsistance  the 
Regiment  received  during  the  time  I  was  with  them  at  Illinois."  Far- 
mer to  Haldimand,  July  29,  1768,  B.  M.,  Add.  MSS.,  21,  677,  fol. 
103.  Among  the  Kaskaskia  Records  is  a  proclamation  issued  by  Far- 
mer to  the  French  assurring  them  that  these  notes  would  be  redeemed. 


YEARS  OF  DISORDER  55 

early  in  the  summer  of  1766,  by  which  time  also  represen- 
tatives of  the  English  merchants  at  Philadelphia  had  arrived 
with  large  stores  of  supplies. 38  Henceforth  we  hear  nothing 
of  a  shortage  of  provisions  in  Illinois,  for  not  only  did  the 
English  merchants  import  supplies  from  the  East,  but  car- 
goes were  brought  up  the  river  from  New  Orleans  by  the 
French,39  and  for  a  time  the  English  government  itself 
transported  the  necessary  provisions  from  Fort  Pitt.40 

Late  in  the  summer  of  1766  Farmer  was  superseded  by 
Lieutenant- Colonel  John  Reed  who  came  from  Mobile  with 
another  detachment  of  the  Thirty-fourth  Regiment.  "  By 
this  time  a  growing  discontent  among  the  Indians  was 
manifesting  itself,  and  became  one  of  the  most  important 
problems  confronting  the  new  commandant  of  Fort  de 
Chartres.  Although  the  majority  of  the  western  tribes  had 
professed  their  allegiance  to  Great  Britain  prior  to  the  occu- 
pation of  Illinois,  there  were  still  large  numbers  who  con- 
sidered themselves  as  allies  of  the  king  of  France.  More- 
over ,  agents  of  the  French  merchants  were  roaming  at  will 
among  the  various  tribes,  spreading  stories  of  English  greed 
and  duplicity 42  in  order  to  retain  control  of  the  lucrative  fur 
trade.43  With  false  promises  of  succor  from  France  in  case  the 

38Gage  to  Conway,  July  15,  1766,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol. 
122;  Baynton,  Wharton  and  Morgan  to  Gage,  August  10,  1766,  John- 
son MSS.,  vol.  XIII,  no.  30. 

39  See  below,  ch.  V. 

40Gage  to  Shelburne,  August  24,  1767,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I., 
vol.  123. 

"I  have  been  unable  to  determine  the  exact  date  of  the  change. 
The  first  document  appearing  with  Reed;s  signature  as  commandant  is 
dated  September  8,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol.  XIII,  no.  104.  Major  Far- 
mer appears  to  have  expected  the  arrival  of  his  successor  in  July  or 
August.  Farmer  to  Barrington,  March  19,  1766,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and 

W.  I.,  vol.    122. 

"Johnson  to  Shelburne,  December  16,  1766,  N.  Y.  Col.  Docs., VII, 
882-883.  *Ibid. 


56  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

Indians  chose  to  rebel  ,**  the  French  emissaries  were  rapidly 
laying  the  foundation  for  another  outbreak  like  that  of  1 763. 
It  was  therefore  imperative  to  adopt  some  immediate  and 
effective  measure  for  the  conciliation  of  the  western  tribes. 
One  of  the  evidences  of  English  neglect  to  which  these 
agents  referred  was  the  apparent  absence  of  any  arrangements 
for  regulating  and  developing  the  fur  trade  and  for  providing 
presents  and  other  concrete  proofs  of  the  goodwill  of  the 
English  nation.    We  find  Captain  Sterling  himself  complain- 
ing of  the  "  disagreeable  situation"  he  was  in,"  without 
an  Agent  or  Interpreter  for  the  Indians,  or  Merchandize 
for  presents  to  them  which  they  all  expect. ' ' 45  The  English 
government  had  indeed  been  very  slow  in  formulating  and 
executing  any  definite  program  for  Indian  management. 
In  1764,  shortly  after  the  announcement  of  the  proclama- 
tion of  1763,  guaranteeing  the  Indians  in  the  possession  of 
their  lands,  Lord  Hillsborough  and   the  Board  of  Trade 
draughted  a   plan   providing   for   the  government  of   the 
Indian  reservation  and  the  regulation  of  the  trade. 46  Among 
other  things  it  was  provided  that  in  the  future  Indian  affairs 
would  be  directed  by  two  superintendents,  one  in  the  north- 
ern and  one  in  the  southern  district.     In  the  former,  which 
included  the  territory  north  of  the  Ohio  River,  an  interpre- 
ter, a  gunsmith,  and  a  commissary,  who  was  to  represent 
the  government  in  all  political  transactions  with  the  Indians 
and  to  look  after  the  enforcement  of  the  trade  regulations 
defined  in  the  plan,  were  to  reside  at  each  Indian  post, 

44  Johnson  to  Lords  of  Trade,  March  22,  1766,  ibid.,  817;  Johnson 
to  Shelburne,  December  16,  1766,  ibid.,  882-883;  Johnson  to  Lords 
of  Trade,  January  15,  1767,  Dartmouth  Papers,  Fourteenth  Report, 
Royal  Hist.  MSS.  Comm.,  Appendix  X. 

"Sterling  to  Gage,  October  18,  1765,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I., 
vol.  122. 

46  Can.  Arch.  Report,  1904,  242-246. 


YEARS  OF  DISORDER  57 

under  the  immediate  direction  of  the  general  superintendent 
and  his  deputies.  The  military  officials  were  expected  to 
give  advice  and  assistance  but  they  could  take  no  independ- 
ent action  except  in  cases  of  emergency  or  where  the  nego- 
tiations were  purely  military. 

This  plan  of  the  Board  of  Trade,  however,  was  proposed 
at  an  unfortunate  time.  The  Stamp  Act,  which  had  been 
recently  passed  with  the  view  of  raising  money  for  imperial 
purposes,  met  with  such  vigorous  opposition  on  the  part  of 
the  colonies,  that  Parliament  hesitated  to  take  formal  action 
on  a  measure  entailing  considerable  additional  expense. 
Although  no  definite  Parliamentary  action  was  ever  taken 
on  the  plan,  the  Board  of  Trade  directed  the  Indian  super- 
intendents to  put  into  execution  such  parts  of  it  as  they 
found  practicable.47  For  some  reason,  however,  Sir  Wil- 
liam Johnson,  who  had  directed  Indian  affairs  in  America 
since  1756  and  who  had  been  appointed  superintendent  for 
the  northern  department,  delayed  for  more  than  a  year  the 
appointment  of  the  Indian  officers  indicated  in  the  plan.  *8 
When  finally  on  April  17,  17 66,  he  appointed  Edward  Cole 
to  be  commissary  of  Indian  affairs  in  the  Illinois  country,49 

47 "  Representation  of  the  Lords  of  Trade  on  Indian  Affairs,  March 
17,  1768  "./V.  Y.  Co!.  Docs. ,  VIII,  24.  See  also  Johnson  to  Lords 
of  Trade,  March  22,  1766,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol.  XII,  no.  101,  and 
N.  Y.  Col.  Docs.,  VII,  817.  For  further  notice  of  the  plan  see  below, 
ch.  V. 

48  In  this  Johnson  apparently  acted  on  the  advice  of   Gage.     See 
Gage  to  Johnson,  February  2,  1765,  Parkman  Coll.,  Pontiac-Miscell., 
1765-1778.     It  is  probable  that  they  wanted  to  make  sure  that  such 
appointments  could  be  supported. 

49  Cole  to  Johnson,  June  23,  1766,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol.  XII,  no.  218. 
See  also  the  deed   for  a  house  purchased  at  Fort  de  Chartres  by  the 
government  through  Cole  as  commissary,  which  was  sworn  to  by  com- 
mandant Reed.     Johnson  MSS.,  XIII,  no.  104.     Almost  all  previous 
writers  on  western  history  have  given  currency  to  the  idea  that  Edward 
Cole  was  the  military  commandant  at   Fort  de  Chartres  from  1766  to 
1768  and  that  he  was  followed  by  Colonel  Reed  who  governed  but  a 


58  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

it  was  found  necessary  to  send  an  additional  representative 
of  the  Indian  department  to  Fort  de  Chartres  to  perfect,  if 
possible,  a  general  pacification  of  the  western  Indians. 

Early  in  February  General  Gage  and  Sir  William  Johnson 
arranged  with  George  Croghan  to  undertake  a  second  mis- 
sion in  the  West. 50  Croghan  was  probably  the  best-fitted 
man  in  the  colonies  for  such  an  undertaking.  He  had  been 
one  of  the  most  successful  traders  in  the  West  and  knew 
personally  the  chiefs  of  most  of  the  western  tribes.  His 
familiarity  with  the  languages  and  customs  of  the  various 
nations  gave  him  a  prestige  which  perhaps  few  English  offi- 
cials, except  Sir  William  Johnson,  could  command.  Equip- 
ped with  Indian  presents  to  the  value  of  over  three  thous- 
and pounds  51  and  with  instructions  as  to  their  distribution 
and  the  general  purpose  of  the  mission, 52  Croghan  set  out 

few  months.  This  is  an  error,  which  has  been  repeated  by  the  follow- 
ing writers:  Moses,  ///.,  Hist,  and  Statis.,  I,  137;  Moses,  "Court  of 
Enquiry  at  Ft.  Chartres",  in  Chicago  Hist.  Soc.  Colls.,  IV,  292; 
Mason,  Chapters  from  III.  Hist.,  278;  Parrish,  Historic  III.,  184; 
Wallace,  ///.  and  I.a.  under  French  Rule,  395;  Dunn,  Hist,  of  In- 
diana, 76. 

50  Croghan  to  Johnson,  February  14,  1766,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol.  XII, 
no.  42;   Johnson  to  Croghan,  February  21,  1766,  ibid.,  no.  60. 

51  Gage  to  Johnson,  April  7,  1766,  Gage's  Letters. 

52 Instructions  to  George  Croghan,  April  16,  1766,  Parkman  Coll., 
Pontiac-Miscell.,  1765—1778.  The  instructions  to  Croghan  are  signed 
by  General  Gage.  While,  generally  speaking,  Sir  William  Johnson 
was  the  chief  authority  in  Indian  affairs,  there  seems  to  have  been  no 
very  clear  line  of  division  between  the  Indian  and  military  departments. 
While  on  the  one  hand  all  the  correspondence  with  the  subordinate 
Indian  officials  and  with  the  home  government  was  carried  on  by  Sir 
William  Johnson,  as  an  examination  of  the  New  York  Colonial  Docu- 
ments and  the  Johnson  MSS.  will  indicate,  on  the  other  hand  all  the 
receipts  for  Indian  expenditures  had  to  pass  through  Gage's  hands  and 
receive  his  approval  before  becoming  valid.  On  one  occasion  he  re- 
fused to  sign  the  bills  drawn  by  Commissary  Cole.  See  Cole  to  Croghan, 
December  19,  1767,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol.  XV,  no.  183;  Gage  to  Hills- 
borough,  March  12,  1768,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  124.  For 
further  evidence  of  this  confusion  see  Johnson  to  Shelburne,  April  I, 
1767,  N.  Y.  Col.  Does.,  VII,  914. 


YEARS  OF  DISORDER  59 

for  Fort  de  Chartres  late  in  April,  1 7 66, 53  arriving  there 
August  2oth. 54  The  newly  appointed  commissary,  Edward 
Cole,  arrived  from  Detroit  about  the  same  time. 55 

Croghan  found  several  nations  of  Indians  collected  at 
Kaskaskia,  and  after  consulting  with  Commandant  Reed, 
issued  a  call  for  a  general  meeting  to  be  held  on  August 
25th.  The  chiefs  and  principal  warriors  of  eight  nations, 
comprising  some  twenty-two  tribes,  obeyed  the  summons. 
Deputies  from  the  Six  Nations  and  the  Delaware  and 
Shawnee  tribes  had  accompanied  Croghan  from  Fort  Pitt,56 
so  that  the  congress  became  one  of  considerable  import- 
ance. Although  the  presence  of  so  many  tribes  made  the 
negotiations  difficult  to  carry  on ,  Croghan  was  able  in  a  few 
days  to  finish  the  business  to  the  satisfaction  of  nearly  every 
one  present.  A  general  peace  and  alliance  was  declared 
between  the  English  and  all  the  western  and  northern 
Indians  5T  except  those  tribes  with  whom  the  French  had 
sufficient  influence  to  keep  them  from  the  conference. 58 

53  Gage  to  Johnson,  April  13,  1766,  Gage's  Letters.     He  probably  left 
New  York  at  that.  time.     He  left  Fort  Pitt  June  18,  accompanied  by 
the  merchant,  George  Morgan,  and  by  Lieutenant  Hutchins  and  Captain 
Gordon  of  the  army,  Morgan  to  his  wife,  June  20,  1766,  MS.  letter  in 
possession  of  Mrs.  E.  S.  Thacher,  Nordhoff,  Cal. 

54  Croghan   to  Johnson,  September    10,    1766,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol. 
XIII,  no.  80. 

55Cole  to  Johnson,  June  23,  1766,  ibid.,  vol.  XII,  no.  218. 

56 Croghan  to  Johnson,  September  10,  1766,  ibid.,  vol.  XIII,  no.  80; 
Morgan  to  his  wife,  June  29,  1766,  MS.  letter  in  possession  of  Maria 
P.  Woodbridge,  Marietta,  Ohio.  Morgan's  letters  contain  a  good 
description  of  a  portion  of  this  journey  down  the  Ohio. 

57Croghan  to  Johnson,  September  10,  1766,  Johnson  MSS. ,  vol. 
XIII,  no.  80;  Gage  to  Shelburne,  December  23,  1766,  B.  T.  Papers 
(Hist.  Soc.  Pa.),  vol.  XXVII;  Johnson  to  Shelburne,  January  15, 
1767,  N.  Y.  Col.  Docs.,  VII,  892;  Johnson  to  Lords  of  Trade,  Fifth 
Report,  Royal  Hist.  MSS.  Comm,,  p.  319;  Croghan  to  Gage,  January 
1 6,  1767,  ibid. 

58 Croghan  to  Johnson,  September  10,  1766,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol. 
XIII,  no.  80. 


6o  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

Nevertheless  the  chiefs  who  had  attended  the  congress  soon 
persuaded  these  tribes  to  enter  the  peace  and  on  September 
5th  they  came  to  Fort  de  Chartres  and  publicly  announced 
their  friendship  for  the  English.  59 

Reed  remained  in  command  of  Fort  de  Chartres  until 
1766.  According  to  the  meagre  information  we  have  for 
these  years  the  relation  between  commandant  and  people, 
both  French  and  English,  was  very  unhappy.  If  we  may 
trust  our  informants,60  Reed's  rule  was  characterized  by 
numerous  petty  tyrannies.  By  imposing  a  high  fee  for  ad- 
ministering the  oath  of  allegiance  6;  and  for  the  issuance  of 
marriage  licenses,62  and  by  inflicting  exorbitant  fines  and 
even  imprisonment  for  trivial  off  ences  ,  63  the  commandant 
won  the  ill-will  of  nearly  every  resident  in  the  country.  64 
This  constant  interference  with  the  inhabitants  led  to  a 
movement  early  in  1768  for  the  establishment  of  a  civil 


60  The  chief  source  of  information  is  a  letter  book  kept  by  George 
Morgan,  a  prominent  merchant  in  Illinois  during  the  British  occupation. 
A  copy  of  this  letter  book  is  in  the  Illinois  State  Historical  Library. 
It  is  my  opinion,  however,  that  some  of  his  statements  should  be  dis- 
counted somewhat.     In  July,  1768,  Morgan  established  a  store  at  Vin- 
cennes  on  the  Wabash  River,  and  in  a  letter  of  instructions  to  his  agent, 
Alexander  Williamson,  occurs  the  following  passage:   "  If  you  write  to 
any  of  your  friends  do  not  let  them  know  but  that  the  trade  is  excessive 
Bad  at  the  Post,  lest  some  of  the  Traders  there  shou'd  be  induced  to 
interfere   with   you    .    .    ."     Morgan  doubtless  followed  this  method 
himself.     It  is  possible  that  his  many  statements  regarding  the  tyranny 
of  the  military  government  were  written  for  the  purpose  of  deterring 
other  merchants  from  entering   the  field.     There  was  some  ground, 
however,  for  his  strictures,  since  there  are  some  references  to  the  com- 
mandant's conduct  in  the  correspondence  of  the  parish  priest. 

61  Morgan  to  Baynton  and  Wharton,  December  10,  1767,  Morgan's 
MS.  letter  book. 

62  Father  Meurin  to  Bishop  Briand,  June  II,  1768,  Jesuit  Relations, 
ed.  Thwaites,  LXXI,  43.     The  charge  was  six  piasters. 

63  Morgan  to  Baynton  and  Wharton,  December  10,  1767,  Morgan's 
MS.  letter  book.     Morgan  himself  was  thrown  into  prison  for  a  time. 


YEARS  OF  DISORDER  61 

government,85  but  the  matter  was  not  pushed  at  the  time, 
for  in  February  Colonel  Reed  was  recalled 66  and  the  post  was 
left  temporarily  in  charge  of  Captain  Forbes,  a  subordinate 
officer. 

But  the  friction  between  the  military  commandant  and 
the  French  inhabitants,  although  somewhat  minimized,  did 
not  entirely  disappear  during  the  short  rule  of  Captain 
Forbes.  This  was  illustrated  by  their  attitude  on  the  oc- 
casion of  another  threatened  outbreak  of  the  Indians  in  the 
spring  and  summer  of  1768.  Although  the  peace  of  1766 
had  been  kept  in  good  faith  by  the  few  tribes  of  Illinois 
Indians  who  resided  in  the  immediate  vicinity  of  the  post,67 
those  nations  dwelling  in  the  surrounding  country  began  to 
grow  restless  in  the  course  of  the  following  year.  The 
French  and  Spanish  traders  from  Louisiana  continued  to 
circulate  war  belts  and  messages  among  the  Indians 68  which 
effectively  alienated  them  from  their  new  masters.  More- 
over, the  character  and  method  of  the  British  traders,  whose 
lawlessness  was  frequently  condemned  by  contemporary 
English  observers,69  likewise  contributed  to  turn  the  savages 
to  their  old  friends  and  allies.  Not  only  were  the  Indians 
along  the  Wabash  and  Mississippi  rivers  affected,  but  the 

65 Morgan  to  Baynton  and  Wharton,  February,  1768.  "They  have 
appointed  Mr.  Rumsey  and  myself  to  forward  this  Petition  to  Governor 
Franklin  to  inclose  and  recommend  it  to  the  Board  of  Trade."  Ibid. 

^Gage  to  Hillsborough,  June  18,  1768,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I., 
vol.  124. 

67 Cole  to  Johnson,  July  3,  1767,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol.  XV,  no.  2; 
Morgan's  MS.  letter  book,  passim. 

68  Johnson  to  Gage,  January  15,  1767,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol.  XIV, 
no.  15;  Johnson  to  Shelburne,  October,  1767,  N.  Y.  Col.  Docs.,  VII, 
986;  Johnson  to  Lords  of  Trade,  October  20,  1767,  ibid.,  987. 

89  See  for  example,  Johnson  to  Lords  of  Trade,  October  20,  1767, 
N.  Y.  Col.  Docs.,  VII,  987,  and  Gage  to  Johnson,  January  25,  1767, 
Johnson  MSS.,  vol.  XIV,  no.  28. 


62  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

disaffection  extended  to  the  powerful  Delaware  and  Shawnee 
tribes  of  the  upper  Ohio  River. 70 

It  was  in  preparing  to  meet  a  probable  attack  upon  the 
fort  that  Commandant  Forbes,  in  April,  1768,  ordered  all 
the  Englishmen,  to  the  number  of  fifty  or  sixty,  to  organize 
themselves  into  a  militia, 71  and  likewise  requested  the  French 
to  form  themselves  into  companies. 72  To  this  demand  the 
French  at  first  refused  to  accede.  They  took  the  ground 
that  from  the  nature  of  the  oath  of  allegiance  they  had 
taken,  they  were  not  obliged  to  take  up  arms  which  would 
only  give  offence  to  the  Indians  with  whom  they  had  no 
quarrel.73  They  were,  therefore,  determined  to  remain 
neutral,  M  and  when  Forbes  insisted  upon  obedience  they 
threatened  to  go  over  to  the  Spanish  side  of  the  river.  But 
as  soon  as  the  French  found  that  the  commandant  was  not 
to  be  influenced  by  threats  they  consented  to  be  enrolled. 75 

70 Morgan  to  Baynton  and  Wharton,  April  5,  1768,  Morgan's  MS. 
letter  book;  Gage  to  Shelburne,  March  12,  1768,  Dartmouth  Papers, 
Fourteenth  Report,  Royal  Hist.  MSS.  Comm.,  Appendix  X,  p.  6l. 

71  Morgan  to  Baynton  and  Wharton,  April  5,  1768,  Morgan's  MS. 
letter  book. 

72  Gage  to  Hillsborough,  August  17,  1768,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W. 
I.,  vol.    124;   same   to   same,   January   6,    1769,  Dartmouth    Papers, 
Fourteenth  Report,  Royal  Hist.  MSS.   Comm.,  Appendix  X,  p.  66; 
Gage  to  Hillsborough,  March  5,  1769,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol. 
125. 

"Gage  to  Hillsborough,  August  17,  1768,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I., 
vol.  124.  74  Ibid. 

75  Ibid.  The  following  passage  from  a  letter  of  Lord  Hillsborough  to 
Gage  throws  some  light  on  the  former's  attitude  towards  the  French 
inhabitants:  "  I  must  presume  that  Capt.  Forbes  had  both  good  reason 
and  proper  authority,  tho'  they  do  not  appear  from  your  Letter,  for 
forming  the  Inhabitants  of  the  Illinois  into  a  regular  militia;  but  I  must 
wait  for  further  information  before  I  can  with  precision  form  any  judge- 
ment or  opinion  upon  a  measure,  which  I  confess  seems  in  the  general 
view  of  it,  considering  the  temper  and  disposition  of  the  people  with 
regard  to  whom  it  was  to  take  place,  at  least  of  doubtful  policy,  if  not 
of  dangerous  tendency."  October  12,  1768,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I., 
vol.  124.  See  answer  of  Gage  to  Hillsborough,  March  5,  1769,  P.  R. 
O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  125.  Two  years  later,  during  a  war  between 


YEARS  OF  DISORDER  63 

Forbes's  preparations  were  well  timed,  for  on  May  5, 
1768,  word  reached  him  that  war  parties  from  the  Chippewa, 
Ottawa,  Pottawottomi,  and  Kickapoo  tribes  were  preparing 
for  an  attack  upon  the  fort.  '6  The  defence  was  immediately 
organized,  and  night  and  day  watches  were  set.  A  close 
guard  was  kept  during  the  following  week ,  but  the  projected 
attack  was  never  made.  "  A  day  or  two  before  news  of  the 
contemplated  attack  came,  a  band  of  Pottawottomies  had 
captured  a  soldier  and  his  wife  near  Chartres  village. 
Shortly  afterward  a  party  of  ten  Indians  belonging  to  the 
same  nation  entered  the  village  and  requested  from  Com- 
missary Cole  shelter  and  provisions  for  the  night.  The 
party  was  given  lodging  in  the  Indian  house,  but  Captain 
Forbes  resolved  to  retain  them  as  prisoners  and  therefore 
summoned  them  to  the  fort  for  a  conference.  The  Indians, 
however,  frightened  at  the  sight  of  the  soldiers  under  arms, 
jumped  from  the  windows  and  fled. 78  It  is  probable  that  the 
knowledge  thus  gained  of  the  defensive  preparations  at  the 
fort  induced  the  Indians  to  give  up  the  assault.  Although 
for  a  time  numerous  bands  of  belligerent  savages  were  fre- 
quently seen  in  the  neighborhood  of  the  villages,  79no  further 
attempt  was  made  against  the  English  garrison. 80 

the  Missouri  and  Illinois  Indians,  the  French  again  objected  to  being 
called  into  service.  "Lieut.  Col.  Wilkins  complains  greatly  of  the 
behavior  of  the  French,  who  could  not  be  persuaded  to  speak  to  the 
Invaders,  tho'  the  domestic  Indians  declared  any  Frenchman  might  go 
in  safety.  He  says  in  those  disagreeable  circumstances,  he  summoned 
the  militia,  encouraged  and  threatened,  but  met  with  little  better  than 
an  absolute  refusal,  and  he  was  shortly  after  informed,  and  for  a  cer- 
tainty that  one  of  them  declared  the  Inhabitants  would  rebel."  Gage 
to  Hillsborough,  January  6,  1770,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  126. 

76Jenning's  Journal  (MS.  in  Hist.  Soc.  Pa.  Library),  May  5,  1768. 

77 Ibid.,  May  10,  1768. 

78Jenning's  Journal,  May  6,  1768. 

79  Ibid. ,  passim. 

80  Acts  of  hostility  were  frequent  during  the  summer  of  1768,  espe- 


64  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

The  unhappy  relation  existing  between  commandant  and 
people  during  the  administrations  of  Reed  and  Forbes  con- 
tinued under  Willkins,  who  took  command  September  5 
1 768. 81  There  were ,  moreover,  numerous  disagreements  be- 
tween the  English  residents  and  the  French,  and  among  the 
French  themselves  there  was  almost  continual  strife. 82  Nat- 
urally a  litigious  people,  the  French  were  thrown  into  dis- 
order when  the  judicial  system  to  which  they  had  been  ac- 
customed since  the  foundation  of  the  colony  was  transferred 
to  the  Spanish  side.  It  is  true  that  the  first  English  com- 
mandant had  ordered  the  establishment  of  a  civil  court, 
with  the  right  of  appeal  to  the  commandant,  but  we  have 
no  record  of  any  activity  on  the  part  of  such  a  court. 

daily  along  the  Ohio  River.  Early  in  July  a  hunting  party  of  ten  or 
twelve  men  sent  from  Fort  de  Chartres  by  Baynton,  Wharton  and 
Morgan  was  attacked  near  the  mouth  of  the  Wabash  River  and  all  but 
one  were  killed.  A  little  later  a  party  of  whites  from  Virginia  was  fired 
upon  in  the  same  region  and  only  one  man  escaped.  Similar  outrages 
occurred  in  other  localities  about  the  same  time.  Morgan  to  Baynton 
and  Wharton,  July  20,  1768,  Morgan's  MS.  letter  book;  Forbes  to 
Gage,  July  28,  1768,  Johnson  MS'S.,  vol.  XVI,  no.  117;  Wilkins  to 
Gage,  August  15,  1768,  ibid.,  no.  140;  Gage  to  Johnson,  October  10, 
1768,  Gage's  Letters;  Gage  to  Hillsborough,  October  14,  1768,  P.  R. 
O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  124;  same  to  same,  November  8,  1768,  ibid. 
These  isolated  instances  appear  insignificant,  but  judging  from  the  offi- 
cial correspondence  of  the  time,  their  importance  can  scarcely  be  over- 
estimated by  the  student  of  the  American  Revolution.  There  was  a 
constant  apprehension  on  the  part  of  the  officials  that  another  Indian 
rebellion  would  break  out.  It  was  well  known  that  the  French  and 
Spanish  were  doing  all  in  their  power  to  bring  about  such  an  event. 
Note  the  apprehension  at  this  time  of  Gage,  Johnson,  and  Hillsborough, 
in  Gage  to  Shelburne,  March  12,  1768,  Dartmouth  Papers,  Fourteenth 
Report,  Royal  Hist.  MSS.  Comm.,  Appendix  X,  p.  61 ;  Hillsborough  to 
Gage,  October  12,  1768,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  124;  Johnson 
to  Hillsborough,  October  23,  1768,  N.  Y.  Col.  Docs.,  VIII,  105-106. 

81  Moses,  "  Court  of  Enquiry  ",  in  Chicago  Hist.  Soc.  Colls.,  IV,  292. 
He  brought  several  companies  of  the  Eighteenth  or  Royal  Regiment  of 
Ireland  from  Philadelphia,  leaving  there  in  June.     Gage  to  Hillsbor- 
ough, June  18,  1768,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I. ,  vol.  124. 

82  Ensign  Butricke  to  Geo.  Barnsley,  February  12,  1769,  Hist.  Maga- 
zine, VIII,  262:   Moses,  "  Court  of  Enquiry",  in   Chicago  Hist.  Soc. 
Colls.,  IV,  292-293. 


YEARS  OF  DISORDER  65 

There  is  some  evidence ,  however,  that  in  the  various  villages 
there  were  certain  local  courts  83  and  resort  was  frequently 
had  to  courts  of  arbitration. 84  The  fact  nevertheless  remains 
that  there  was  no  settled  judicial  power  in  Illinois,  with  the 
result  that  the  peace  of  the  villages  was  disturbed  by  the 
constant  bickerings  of  the  inhabitants,  both  French  and 
English. 85 

In  an  effort  to  correct  this  evil  Commandant  Wilkins  is- 
sued a  proclamation  on  November  12,  1768,  declaring  his 
resolution  to  establish  a  court  of  judicature  for  the  settle- 
ment of  all  civil  disputes. 86  Commissions  of  the  peace  were 
granted  to  six  of  the  more  prominent  inhabitants,  both 
French  and  English,  who  were  authorized  "  to  form  a  Civil 
Court  of  Judicatory,  with  powers  expressed  in  their  Com- 
missions to  Hear  and  Try  in  a  Summary  way  all  Causes  of 
Debt  and  Property  that  should  be  brought  before  them  and 

83"Antoine  Cecirre,  Captain,  judge  and  commandant  accompanied 
by  the  notary  and  sergeant,  etc."  Cahokia  Records,  British  Period. 
In  another  document  the  same  person  is  called  "  juge  et  Commandant 
du  village  des  Cahokias",  ibid.  He  is  also  called  "Captain  of  militia 
and  commandant",  ibid.  James  Rumsey  signed  himself  in  1768  as 
"Judge  Advocate  of  the  Province  of  Illinois".  His  duties,  however, 
were  confined  to  administering  the  oath  of  allegiance  and  examining 
land  titles.  He  was  purely  an  assistant  to  Commandant  Wilkins.  See 
///.  Hist.  Colls.,  I,  315-316. 

84  For  example,  in  Cahokia  there  was  a  case  of  arbitration  in  regard 
to  the  estate  of  a  deceased  Jacques  Compte.     Cahokia  Records,  British 
Period. 

85  See  account  of  an  address  of  the  French  to  Commandant  Wilkins 
in  letter  of  George   Morgan   to  Baynton   and  Wharton,  October  29, 
1768,  Division  of  Pub.  Records,  Pa.  State  Library. 

86  MS.  Court  Record  (Chester,  111.),  p.  23;  Ensign  Butricke  to  Barns- 
ley,  February  12,  1769,  Hist. Magazine,  VIII,  262;  Edmund  Flagg,  The 
Far   West,  reprinted  in  Thwaites,  Early   Western   Travels,  XXVII. 
Flagg's  narrative  was  written  in  1836.    In  a  note  (p.  79)  he  quotes  several 
paragraphs  from  the  court  record,  including  merely  the  account  of  the 
preliminary  proceedings  of  the  court.     He  says,  by  way  of  explanation, 
that  "it  purports  to  be  transcribed  from  the  state  records,  and  first 
appeared  in  a  western  newspaper." 


66  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

to  give  their  Judgement  thereon  according  to  the  Laws  of 
England  to  the  Best  of  their  Judgement  and  understand- 
ing." 87  We  may  fairly  ask  at  this  point,  by  what  authority 
the  military  commandant  could  authorize  a  court  to  give 
"Judgement  according  to  the  laws  of  England  ".  Atten- 
tion has  been  called  in  another  chapter  to  the  fact  that  until 
the  laws  of  Great  Britain  were  definitely  extended  to  this 
territory  the  French  could  be  judged  only  by  their  own 
laws.  M  It  has  likewise  been  pointed  out  that  no  act  of 
king  or  Parliament  had  ever  extended  English  law  to  the 
West.  It  was  therefore  beyond  the  legal  competence  of 
Commandant  Wilkins  or  of  the  commander-in-chief  of  the 
army  to  make  such  alteration. 

Turning  to  another  point  of  view,  did  Wilkins  create  the 
court  on  his  own  responsibility  ?  Historians  have  generally 
taken  the  view  that  Wilkins 's  action  was  in  pursuance  of 
explicit  orders  from  the  commander-in-chief,  General 
Gage. 89  There  is,  indeed,  some  justification  for  this  view, 
for  Wilkins  declared  in  1770  that  he  had  created  the  court 
"  by  virtue  of  the  power  to  me  given  by  his  Excellencey 
Major  General  Thomas  Gage,  commander-in-chief  of  his 

8TMS.  Court  Record,  p.  23.  See  also  Bulricke  to  Barnsley,  February 
12,  1769,  Hist.  Magazine.  VIII,  262:  Flagg,  The  Far  West,  in 
Thwaites,  Early  Western  Travels,  XXVII,  79.  There  is  a  slight  mis- 
conception as  to  the  number  of  judges  appointed.  Moses,  ///.,  Hist, 
and  Stat.,  I,  137,  and  the  same  author,  "Court  of  Enquiry",  in 
Chicago  Hist  Soc.  Colls  ,  IV,  292;  Wallace,  ///.  and  I. a.  under  French 
Rule,  396,  and  a  number  of  others,  including  Bancroft,  state  that  there 
were  seven  judges  appointed.  Ensign  Butricke.  who  wrote  concerning 
the  court,  asserted  that  there  were  "  several "  judges,  but  according 
to  the  record  itself  there  were  but  six  commissions  issued  and  only  six 
judges  ever  appear. 

85  See  above,  ch.  II. 

89  Moses,  ///  ,  Hist,  and  Stat.,  I,  137;  Moses,  "Court  of  Enquiry", 
in  Chicago  Hist  Soc.  Colls.,  IV.  292;  Winsnr,  West-ward  Movement, 
40;  Wallace,  ///.  and  La.  under  French  Rule,  396;  Davidson  and 
Sttive,  Complete  Hist,  of  III.,  165;  Bancroft,  Jlist.  of  U.  S.  (ed. 
1854),  VI,  224-225. 


YEARS  OF  DISORDER  67 

Majesty's  forces  in  North  America." 90  Considered  alone, 
this  sounds  convincing.  But  Gage  evidently  had  not  the 
slightest  knowledge  of  the  existence  of  the  court.  In  all  of 
that  officer's  official  correspondence  with  the  home  gov- 
ernment, with  subordinate  officials  in  Illinois,  and  with  Sir 
William  Johnson,  there  is  not  the  least  mention  of  a  court 
of  any  character.  In  fact  Gage  declared  in  1771,  when 
writing  of  the  conditions  which  had  prevailed  in  Illinois 
since  1765  :  "I  perceive  there  has  been  wanting  judicial 
power  to  try  and  determine.  There  has  been  no  way  to 
bring  Controversys  and  Disputes  properly  to  a  determina- 
tion or  delinquents  to  punishment."  91  Lord  Hillsborough, 
secretary  for  the  colonies,  whose  knowledge  of  occurrences 
in  Illinois  was  remarkable,  and  whose  comments  on  con- 
ditions are  always  noteworthy,  likewise  gives  no  intimation 
that  he  was  aware  of  the  existence  of  the  court.  More- 
over, Wilkins  himself  is  silent  on  the  subject  when  he  writes 
to  Gage,  Secretary -at- War  Barrington,  and  others.92  It  is 
therefore  probable  that  Wilkins  received  no  order  from 
Gage  to  establish  a  court,  and  that  he  merely  used,  as  a 
basis  for  his  action,  the  general  instructions  of  the  com- 
mander-in-chief  to  keep  order  in  the  country. 

The  court  consisted  of  six  judges  throughout  its  history 

90 MS.  Court  Record,  p.  23.  He  made  a  similar  statement  about 
the  same  time :  '' D'autant  que  par  les  Pouvoisque  .  .  .  etoient  donnas 
par  Son  Excellence  1'Hon  Thomas  Gage  .  .  Proclamation  of 

Wilkins  concerning  the  justices  of  the  court,  March  12,  1770,  Kas- 
kaskia  Records,  British  Period. 

91  Gage  to  Hillsborough,  August  6,  1771,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I., 
vol.  128. 

92  A  few  of  the  longer  and  more  detailed  letters  relating  especially  to 
Illinois  from  1768  to   1770  have  been  selected  for  citation:    Gage  to 
Hillsborough,  February  4,  1769,  P.   R.  O.,  Am.  and  \V.  I.,  vol.  125; 
same  to  same,  August  12,   1769,  ibid.\  same  to  same,   September  9, 

1769,  ibid. ;   Wilkins  to  Barrington,  December  5,  1769,  ibid.\    Hills- 
borough  to  Gage,  December  9,  1769,  ibid.;   same  to  same,  July  31, 

1770,  ibid.,  vol.  126;  Gage  to  Hillsborough,  November  10,  1770,  ibid. 


68  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

from  December,  1768  to  June,  1770.  In  the  beginning  it 
was  composed  of  four  Englishmen,  George  Morgan,  James 
Rumsey,93  James  Campbell,  and  James  McMillan,  and  two 
Frenchmen,  Jean  Baptiste  Barbau  and  Pierre  Girardot.  ** 
The  commandant  designated  Morgan  as  the  first  president 
of  the  court. 95  Morgan  was  an  English  trader  who  played 
an  important  role  in  the  affairs  of  the  Illinois  country  from 
1766  to  1771.  He  was  born  in  Philadelphia  in  1741  and 
was  educated  in  Princeton  College.  Through  the  influence 
of  his  father-in-law,  John  Baynton,  he  was  admitted  to  the 
firm  of  Baynton  and  Wharton  of  Philadelphia.  This  com- 
pany had  traded  extensively  among  the  Indians  on  the 
Pennsylvania  border  prior  to  1765,  and  during  the  Indian 
wars  had  lost  heavily.  In  an  attempt  to  retrieve  their  for- 
tunes a  branch  house  was  established  in  the  Illinois  country 
in  1766,  and  Morgan  became  the  firm's  personal  representa- 
tive in  the  West.  He  first  appeared  in  Illinois  in  the  early 
part  of  1766,  remaining  there  the  greater  part  of  the  next 
five  years. gt  According  to  a  contemporaneous  letter,97  the 
appointment  of  Morgan  was  considered  an  offence  by  the 
French  inhabitants.  "The  French  all  hate  the  Morgan- 
ians  ' ' ,  the  writer  declares ,  and  Morgan  himself  is  ' '  uni- 
versally hated  by  them."  Whether  Morgan  was  so  "  uni- 
versally hated"  does  not  appear  from  any  other  document. 

93  Rumsey  was  private  secretary  to  Wilkins. 

MMS.    Court  Record,  p.    i;   Flagg,    The  Far   West,  in  Thwaites, 
Early  Western  Travels,  XXVII,  79. 

95  Butricke  to  Barnsley,  February  12,   1769,  Hist.  Magazine,  VIII, 
262;   MS.  Court  Record,  p.  i. 

96  After   his  experience  in  the  Illinois   country  Morgan   served  the 
Revolutionary  cause  in  the  capacity  of  Indian  agent.     He  died  in  1810. 
For  further  details  of  Morgan's  life  see  "Biography  of  Col.  George 
Morgan  ",  by  Julia  Morgan  Harding,  in  the  Washington  (Pa.)  Observer, 
May  21,  1904. 

97  Butricke  to  Barnsley,  February  12,   1769,  Hist.  Magazine,  VIII, 
262. 


YEARS  OF  DISORDER  69 

It  is  probable,  however,  that  the  appointment  was  made  in 
order  to  favor  the  trading  company  which  Morgan  repre- 
sented in  Illinois,  for  Wilkins  and  Morgan  were  at  first  inti- 
mate friends,  and  we  find  the  former  making  large  grants 
of  land  to  the  English  merchants,  receiving  in  return  a  por- 
tion as  compensation. 98 

The  court  retained  its  original  composition  until  Novem- 
ber, 1769,  when  the  name  of  David  Williams  appeared  as 
judge.  "  It  is  impossible  to  ascertain  which  judge  he  super- 
seded, for  there  were  few  sittings  in  which  the  entire  court 
was  present.  From  this  time  changes  were  made  rapidly. 
In  February,  1770,  Louis  Vivial,  a  prominent  Frenchman 
of  Kaskaskia,  became  a  judge,100  and  in  May,  Charleville 
and  Louviere  were  given  commissions. 101  The  court  then 
consisted  of  Morgan,  who  still  acted  as  president,  Barbau, 
Girardot,  Viviat,  Charleville,  and  Louviere,  all  the  English- 
men except  Morgan  having  been  displaced  by  Frenchmen. 
This  complete  transformation  was  of  course  the  work  of  Wil- 
kins himself,  for  the  court  was  in  every  sense  his  own  crea- 
tion. March  4,  1770,  we  find  him  extending  its  jurisdic- 
tion to  criminal  as  well  as  civil  cases  :  "  And  whereas 
several  Disputes  and  Controversys  have  from  time  to  time 
arisen  Between  the  Inhabitants  of  the  Country  aforesaid  as 
well  as  Assaults  and  Batteries  Committed  which  by  the 
Powers  by  me  Heretofore  given  to  Said  Court  may  not  ap- 
pear to  be  cognizable  by  them,  .  .  .  And  as  the  present 

88  Statement  of  George  Morgan  and  Jas.  Rumsey  that  Wilkins  had 
granted  lands  to  Joseph  Galloway,  Jas.  Rumsey,  John  Baynton  and 
Company,  and  Baynton,  Wharton  and  Morgan  on  April  12,  1769,  and 
on  April  15,  certain  land  to  George  Morgan  and  Samuel  Wharton. 
Wilkins  was  to  receive  one-seventh  part.  The  statement  is  sworn  to  at 
Fort  de  Chartres,  June  25,  1769.  Record  of  Deeds,  p.  131,  Kas- 
kaskia Records,  British  Period. 

"MS.  Court  Record,  p.  21. 

100  Ibid. ,  p.  22.  101  Ibid.,  p.  28. 


70  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

Establishment  of  the  Country  does  not  admit  of  Tryals  by 
Juries  on  account  of  its  Small  number  of  Inhabitants  as 
Well  as  their  Want  of  Knowledge  of  the  Laws  and  Cus- 
toms of  England.  I  do  hereby  therefore  Further  Authorize 
and  Impower  the  Said  Court  to  Hear,  Try  and  Determine 
in  a  Summary  Way  all  Disputes,  Controversys  and  Debates 
Brought  before  them  whether  the  Same  be  Assaults,  etc., 
upon  the  Person  or  Trespass  upon  the  Property  of  the  In- 
habitants of  the  Country  aforesaid,  and  to  impose  and  bring 
such  Fines  and  Inflict  such  Corporate  Punishment  or 
commit  Offenders  to  Jayle  at  the  discretion  of  the  said 
Court  .  .  .  "102  A  little  later  we  find  him  complaining 
that  the  people  are  not  sufficiently  interested  to  consent  to 
serve  as  justices.  m 

In  the  early  period  of  the  history  of  the  court  cases  be- 
tween French  and  English  were  generally  decided  in  favor 
of  the  latter ;  but  with  the  change  in  its  composition  this 
partiality  in  favor  of  Englishmen  vanished,104  and  with  it 

102  MS.  Court  Record,  p.  23.     It  will  be  observed  that  trial  by  jury 
was  not  introduced  into  Illinois  at  this  time.     The  contrary  has,  how- 
ever, been  generally  stated  by  historians  of  the  period.     Justin  Winsor 
writes  that  the  "  severest  wrench  to  the  feelings  of  the  French  .    .    . 
came  with  the  establishment,  under  orders  from  Gage,  of  a  court  and 
jury  according  to   English  usage  .    .    .  ",    Westward  Movement,  40. 
The  same  statement  is  made  by  Wallace,  ///.  and  La.  under  French. 
Rule,   396,    Davidson   and   Stuv6,    Complete  Hist,    of  III.,    165,   and 
Moses,  ///.,  Hist,  and  Stat.,  I,  140.     In  a  later  work  Moses  takes  the 
other   and   more   correct   view,    although   adducing   no   proof.       See 
"Court  of  Enquiry",  in  Chicago  Hist.  Soc.  Colls.,  IV,  292.     In  addi- 
tion to  the  testimony  of  \Yilkins  and  the  court  record  itself,  we  have  the 
statement  of  Butricke,  an  eye-witness,  that  the  court  was  "  to  deter- 
mine on  all  causes  of  debt,  without  a  Jury  ",  letter  to  Barnsley,  Febru- 
ary 17,  1769,  Hist.  Magazine,  VIII,  262. 

103  Proclamation  by  Wilkins,  March  4,  1770,  concerning  the  justices 
of  the  peace  at  Fort  de  Chartres,  Kaskaskia  Records,  British  Period. 

104  Out  of  twenty-one  cases  heard  between  December  6,  1768,  and 
June  6,  1770,  of  which  there  is  record  (pp.  5-10  of  the  record  being 
gone),  eleven  were  between  English  and  French,  the  former  winning 
nine  decisions.     Of  the  other  two,  one  decision  was  given  in  favor  of 


YEARS  OF  DISORDER  71 

disappeared  in  a  measure  evidences  of  national  antagonism. 
In  place  of  the  latter  came  the  formation  of  two  new  parties, 
one  headed  by  Wilkins  and  his  secretary,  Rumsey,  and  the 
other  by  Morgan,  which  was  composed  of  the  greater  portion 
of  the  discontented  French.  The  genesis  of  these  factions 
is  found  in  the  definite  break  between  court  and  comman- 
dant on  June  6,  1770,  when  the  judges  acted  contrary  to 
the  wishes  and  orders  of  the  commandant.  The  court  in 
one  instance  ordered  the  sale  for  debt  of  a  house  belonging 
to  Captain  Philip  Pittman,105  which  was  contrary  to  the  ex- 
plicit order  of  Wilkins. 10*  Another  cause  of  friction  was 
the  decision  of  the  judges  to  hold  the  future  sessions  of  the 
court  at  Kaskaskia. 107  Until  March,  1770,  the  sessions  had 
been  held  alternately  at  Kaskaskia  and  Chartres  village,  but 
after  that  date  they  were  held  at  Chartres  village  only. 108 
The  change  to  Kaskaskia  was  very  inconvenient  to  the  com- 
mandant, since  his  home  was  at  Fort  de  Chartres. 

On  the  same  day,  June  6,  Joseph  L'Esperance,  an  attor- 
ney-at-law,  complained  to  the  court  of  his  inability  to  obtain 
writs  of  attachment  for  which  he  had  applied  to  the  com- 
mandant and  his  secretary. m  The  complainant  further 
alleged  that  one  of  the  writs  prayed  for  was  at  the  instance 
of  his  client,  George  Morgan,  president  of  the  court,  and 

one  Daniel  Blotiin,  a  son-in-law  of  Charleville,  and  a  person  always 
favored  by  the  English.  Four  cases  were  between  Englishmen,  and  six 
involved  Frenchmen  alone,  in  which  Bloiiin  was  either  defendant  or 
plaintiff  and  won  every  decision.  MS.  Court  Record,  passim. 

105  The  same  Fittman  who  wrote  Present  State  of  the  European  Set- 
tlements on  the  Miss. 

108  MS.  Court  Record,  pp.  s8ff .  "" Ibid. ,  pp.  3;ff. 
108 Chartres  village,  December  6,  1768;   Kaskaskia,  January  2,  1769; 

Chartres  village,  April  4,  1769;  Kaskaskia,  May  3,  1769;  Chartres 
village,  November,  1769;  Kaskaskia,  December  5,  1769;  Chartres 
village,  Febiuary  6,  March  6,  April  3,  June  5,  1770;  Kaskaskia,  June 
6,  1770. 

109  MS.  Court  Record,  p.  45. 


72  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

Morgan  then  added  his  testimony  to  the  effect  that  on 
several  occasions  since  the  i4th  of  May  he  had  applied  in 
vain  to  Wilkins  for  a  similar  writ.  no  In  consequence  of 
these  relations  the  court  drew  up  and  unanimously  adopted 
a  memorial  to  the  commandant,  setting  forth  that  his  action 
was  very  prejudicial  and  unfair  to  creditors  and  praying 
that  he  might  not  interfere  with  the  course  of  justice.  ni 
The  court  then  adjourned  to  meet  the  following  month, lu 
but  there  is  no  record  of  any  further  meetings  after  June  6. 
Presumably  Wilkins  abolished  the  institution  which  no 
longer  supported  him.  The  importance  of  the  details  con- 
nected with  the  termination  of  the  court  will  be  seen  in  a 
later  chapter  in  connection  with  the  movement  inaugurated 
by  the  French  for  the  establishment  of  a  civil  government 
in  Illinois. 

Side  by  side  with  the  court  of  judicature  there  grew  up 
another  method  of  settling  civil  disputes,  by  what  were 
termed  courts  of  inquiry,  composed  of  military  officers.  A 
court  of  inquiry  was  called  January  13,  1769,  to  settle  cer- 
tain disputes  between  the  merchant,  George  Morgan,  and  a 
number  of  complaining  Frenchmen.  It  continued  until  Jan- 
uary 20,  and  the  result  was  satisfactory  to  neither  party.113 
Another  court  was  convened  September  24,  1770  to  adjust 
difficulties  between  Baynton,  Wharton  and  Morgan  and 
Richard  Bacon.  m  The  details  of  the  hearing  afford  further 
evidence  of  the  existence  of  factional  strife  between  the 
Morgan  and  Wilkins  parties. 

110 MS.  Court  Record,  p.  45.  ™  Ibid.  ™  Ibid.,  p.  46. 

u*Hist.  Magazine,  VIII,  270. 

114 The  complete  record  of  the  proceedings  has  been  printed  by 
Moses,  in  Chicago  Hist.  Soc.  Colls. ,  IV,  294-356.  Moses  states  that 
he  obtained  a  manuscript  copy  from  the  Wisconsin  Historical  Society 
Library,  but  Dr.  Thwaites,  the  secretary,  finds  no  such  papers  there 
now.  There  is,  however,  a  manuscript  copy  in  somewhat  different 
form,  in  the  Division  of  Public  Records  of  the  Pennsylvania  State 
Library. 


YEARS  OF  DISORDER  73 

Wilkins  had  his  share  of  trouble  with  the  Indian  problem . 
There  were  constant  rumors  of  war 115  and  of  attacks  upon 
the  Illinois  post, 116  and  murders  of  whites  became  frequent 
in  the  vicinity  of  Fort  de  Chartres.  m  It  was  therefore  neces- 
sary to  be  on  guard  continuously  against  a  possible  surprise. 
Moreover,  after  the  year  1768,  the  commandant  was  forced 
to  look  after  the  local  management  of  Indian  affairs ;  for  in 

115  Gage  to  Hillsborough,  January  5,  1769,  Dartmouth  Papers,  Four- 
teenth Report,  Royal  Hist.  MSS.  Com. ,  Appendix  X ;  same  to  same, 
February  3,  1767,  ibid.;  same  to  same,  February  4,  1769,  P.  R,  O. , 
Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  125;  Johnson  to  Hillsborough,  June  26,  1769, 
N.  Y.  Col.  Docs.,  VIII,  173;  same  to  same,  August  26,  1769,  ibid., 
184-185;  Gage  to  Hillsborough,  August  12,  1769,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and 
W.  I.,  vol.  125;  same  to  same,  September  9,  1769,  ibid.  A  congress 
of  all  the  western  and  southern  Indians  was  held  on  the  Scioto  River  in 
the  summer  of  1768,  where  the  Delaware  and  Shawnee  Indians  at- 
tempted to  form  a  general  union  against  the  English.  See  Gage  to 
Hillsborough,  September  9,  1769,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  125; 
Gage  to  Haldimand,  August  28,  1770,  B.  M. ,  Add.  MSS.,  21,  664, 
fol.  178,  and  Hillsborough  to  Johnson,  November  15,  1770,  N.  Y. 
Col.  Docs.,  VIII,  254. 

116Bulricke  to  Barnsley,  June  25,  1769,  Hist.  Magazine,  VIII,  27off.; 
Gage  to  Hillsborough,  October  7,  1769,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I., 
vol.  125;  Johnson  to  Gage,  April  6,  1770,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol.  XVIII, 
no.  266;  Gage  to  Johnson,  April  16,  1770,  Gage's  Letters;  Hillsbor- 
ough to  Gage,  June  12,  1770,  P.  R.  O. ,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  126; 
Gage  to  Hillsborough,  December  4,  1771,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I., 
vol.  128.  In  addition  to  the  Indian  troubles,  the  English  residents  and 
soldiers  had  to  contend  with  a  most  distressing  sickness  during  the  years 
1768-1770.  At  one  time,  late  in  1768,  nearly  all  the  soldiers  were  ill 
with  fevers  peculiar  to  that  locality.  See  Morgan's  MS.  letter  book, 
passim  ;  Morgan  to  Baynton  and  Wharton,  October  30,  1768,  Division 
of  Pub.  Records,  Pa.  State  Library;  same  to  John  Baynton,  October 
30,  1768,  ibid. ;  Butricke  to  Barnsley,  February  12,  1769,  Hist. 
Magazine,  VIII,  262. 

117  Morgan  to  Baynton  and  Wharton,  April  24,  1769,  Division  of 
Pub.  Records,  Pa.  State  Library;  Gage  to  Hillsborough,  August  18, 

1770,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  126;   Gage  to  Johnson,  Septem- 
ber 3,    1770,   Gage's  Letters;    Gage  to  Hillsborough,  September  3, 

1771,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  127;   Pa.  Packet  and  General 
Advertiser,  April  6,    1772,  containing   letters   from  Kaskaskia,  June 
14,   1771;   Gage  to  Johnson,  August  14,  1771,  Gage's  Letters;   same 
to  same,  September  10,  1771,  September  24,  1774,  ibid.;  Gage  to  Hills- 
borough,  October  i,  1771,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  128. 


74  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

that  year  the  home  government  withdrew  all  the  special 
Indian  agents  from  the  various  posts  in  consequence  of  the 
transference  of  the  management  of  the  Indians  to  the  colo- 
nies.118  Edward  Cole,  Indian  commissary  in  Illinois,  left 
early  in  1769,  "9  and  with  him  went  others  employed  in  the 
Indian  service.  12°  Thus  was  additional  work  imposed  upon 
the  military  department.  The  significance  of  the  change, 
moreover,  was  not  lost  upon  the  Indians,  who  looked  upon 
it  as  another  evidence  of  the  negligence  of  the  British  gov- 
ernment. m  Wilkins  succeeded,  however,  in  keeping  the 
large  body  of  Indians  pacified.  m  The  murder  of  Pontiac  by 
an  Indian  in  1769  m  led  to  a  civil  war  among  themselves,12* 
which  turned  their  attention  from  the  white  settlers. 

Wilkins's  relations  with  the  Roman  Catholics  were  ap- 
parently amicable,  a  large  part  of  the  regiment  stationed  at 

118  Hillsborough  to  Johnson,  April  15,  1768,  N.  Y.  Col.  Docs.,  VIII, 
57>   58;   Johnson  to  Hillsborough,  October  23,  1768,  ibid,,   105-106; 
same  to  same,  February  15,  1769,  ibid. ,  151. 

119  Cole  to  Johnson,  June  13,  1769,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol.  XVII,  no. 
189.     There  was  considerable  dissatisfaction  with  Cole's  management 
of  Indian  affairs  on    the  ground  of   his  alleged    extravagance.     See 
Maturin  (Gage's  secretary)  to  Baynton,  Wharton  and  Morgan,  May  7, 
1768,  Division  of  Pub.  Records,  Pa.  State  Library. 

120  Return  of  people  employed  in  the  Indian  Department  at  the  Illi- 
nois (1767) : 

A  Commissary .  I-  2CO  Sterling. 

A  Gunsmith L  100       " 

An  Interpreter L    80       " 

A  Doctor  .  .    .    .  L    So      " 


L  460 

131  Johnson  to  Hillsborough,  October  23,  1768,  TV.  Y.  Col.  Docs., 
VIII,  105-106;  same  to  same,  ibid.,  VII,  151. 

122  Gage  to  Hillsborough,  August  12,  1/69,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W. 
L,  vol.  125;  same  to  same,  August  18,  1770,  ibid.,  vol.  126. 

123 Cole  to  Johnson,  June  13,  1769,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol.  XVII,  no. 
189;  Gage  to  Johnson,  August  6,  1769,  Gage's  Letters. 

124Gage  to  Hillsborough,  August  12,  1769,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W. 
I.,  vol.  125;  Gage  to  Johnson,  July  15,  1771,  Gage's  Letters. 


YEARS  OF  DISORDER  75 

Fort  de  Chartres  being  members  of  the  Roman  Catholic 
church.  The  legal  position  of  the  church  had  been  well 
defined  by  the  treaty  of  Paris  and  by  succeeding  documents , 
and  on  the  whole  the  course  pursued  by  the  English  govern- 
ment toward  the  Catholics  of  Illinois  was  an  honorable  one. 
In  the  Illinois  country  the  Jesuits  had  had  charge  of  the  par- 
ish at  Kaskaskia  and  of  the  mission  among  the  Indians  of  the 
same  name.  By  a  royal  decree  in  1764  the  Jesuit  order  in 
France  and  its  dependencies  was  abolished,  and  the  decree 
was  executed  in  the  Illinois  country  in  the  same  year, 125  the 
property  being  confiscated  for  the  use  of  the  French 
king.  m  Not  only  did  the  Jesuits  leave,  but  the  Sulpitians 
likewise  abandoned  their  parishes,127  so  that  at  the  begin- 
ning of  the  British  occupation  not  a  single  priest  was  in  the 
country.  Father  Meurin,  however,  one  of  the  expelled 
priests,  obtained  leave  to  return  to  minister  to  the  aban- 
doned parishes. 128  Illinois  had  always  been  attached  to  the 
bishopric  of  Quebec,  and  in  1768  Bishop  Briand  of  Quebec 
made  Father  Meurin  his  vicar-general  in  Illinois. 129  But 
owing  to  his  age  and  ill-health,  and  the  widely  scattered 
parishes,  it  was  impossible  for  Meurin  to  carry  on  the  work 

125  The  best  contemporary  account  of  this  incident  is  in  Bannisse- 
ment  des  Je suites  de  la  Lottisiane,  September  3,  1764,  in  Jesuit  Re- 
lations, ed.  Thwaites,  LXX,  211-301. 

186 General  Gage  complained  that  the  sale  was  illegal,  because  made 
after  the  treaty  of  cession  of  1763,  Gage  to  Conway,  June  24,  1766, 
P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  122. 

127  M.  Forget,  the  only  remaining  priest  of  that  order  in  1764,  sold 
the  property  at  Cahokia  and  carried  the  proceeds  with  him,  allhough 
his  action  was  opposed  by  many  of  the  inhabitants,  Sterling  to  Gage, 
December  15,  1765,  P.   K.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.    122;   Meurin  to 
Bishop  Briand,  June  II,  1768,  Jesuit  Relations,  ed.  Thwaites,  LXXI, 
37- 

128  Bannifxement  des  JesuiUs  de  la  Louisiane,  September  3,  1764, 
Jesuit  Relations,  ed.  Thwaites,  LXX,  291;   Shea,  Life  of  Archbishop 
Carroll,  113. 

129  Ibid.,  116. 


76  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

alone.  The  English  authorities  made  efforts  to  secure  an 
additional  priest130  but  without  success.  In  1768,  how- 
ever, Bishop  Briand  sent  Father  Pierre  Gibault,  who  took  up 
his  residence  at  Kaskaskia,  Meurin  retiring  to  the  less  popu- 
lous parish  of  Cahokia. 131  Throughout  the  entire  British 
period  we  find  little  or  no  complaint  by  church  officials  of 
the  attitude  of  the  English  government.  Although  politi- 
cally the  French  had  much  to  complain  of  during  the  first 
five  years  of  British  rule,  their  religious  privileges  were  ac- 
corded them  at  all  times. 

130  Gage  to  Conway,  June  24,  1766,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol. 

122. 

131  Shea,  Life  of  Archbishop  Carroll,  125.     Father  Meurin  had  not 
had  a  very  happy  experience  with  the  Kaskaskians.     They  refused  to 
pay  their  tithes,  and  in  numerous  other  ways  showed  him  disrespect. 
He  tells  us  that  the  people  had  lost  their  piety  almost  entirely  during 
the  years  of  chaos  incident  to  the  removal  of  the  Jesuits  and  the  arrival 
of  the  British,  Meurin  to  Bishop  Briand,  June  u,  1768,  Jesuit  Rela- 
tions, ed.  Thwaites,  LXXI,  4iff. ;   Shea,  Life  of  Archbishop  Carroll, 
114-129. 


CHAPTER  V. 

TRADE  CONDITIONS  IN  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY, 
I76S-I775. 

THE  peltry  trade  had  been  one  of  the  chief  elements  in 
the  rivalry  between  France  and  England  in  the  Ohio  and 
Mississippi  valleys.  It  was  the  main  support  of  the  French 
government  in  Canada  and  now  that  the  English  were  in 
possession  of  the  great  peltry  districts  the  management  of 
the  trade  deserved  most  serious  consideration.  It  was  be- 
coming of  increasing  importance  to  the  manufacturing 
monopoly  of  the  mother  country,  and  therefore,  in  the 
minds  of  English  statesmen,  deserved  far  more  attention 
than  did  the  few  thousand  French  colonists  scattered 
throughout  the  West.  The  desire  to  increase  this  branch 
of  commerce  dictated  in  large  measure  those  clauses  in  the 
proclamation  of  1763,  which  forbade  the  formation  of  settle- 
ments or  the  purchase  of  lands  within  the  Indian  reserva- 
tion, but  which  at  the  same  time  declared  that  trade  with 
the  Indians  should  be  free  and  open  to  all  English  subjects 
alike.  Again,  the  plan  proposed  in  1764  related  solely  to 
the  management  of  the  Indians  and  to  the  regulation  of  the 
trade  with  a  view  to  making  the  English  monopoly  of  in- 
trinsic value  to  the  empire.  Even  towards  the  close  of  the 
period  under  consideration  there  was  little  or  no  change  of 
policy  so  far  as  official  utterances  are  concerned.  In  1772, 
in  a  report  to  the  crown,  the  Lords  of  Trade  made  the  fol- 
lowing declaration  :  "  '  The  great  object  of  colonizing  upon 

77 


78  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

the  continent  of  North  America  has  been  to  improve  and 
extend  the  commerce,  navigation,  and  manufactures  of 
this  kingdom  ...  it  does  appear  to  us,  that  the  extension 
of  the  fur  trade  depends  entirely  upon  the  Indians  being 
undisturbed  in  the  possession  of  their  hunting  grounds ; 
that  all  colonizing  does  in  its  nature,  and  must  in  its  con- 
sequences, operate  to  the  prejudice  of  that  branch  of  com- 
merce.' .  .  .  '  Let  the  savages  enjoy  their  deserts  in  quiet . . . 
Were  they  driven  from  their  forests  the  peltry  trade  would 
decrease.'  M1 

Under  the  French  regime  the  western  Indians  and  their 
trade  had  been  managed  with  greater  success  than  had  the 
tribes  living  under  English  influence.  The  success  of 
France  was  due  largely  to  her  policy  of  centralization,  com- 
bined with  the  genial  character  of  the  French  fur  trader  and 
the  influence  of  the  missionary.  The  English,  on  the  con- 
trary, had  managed  their  relations  with  the  Indians  through 
the  agency  of  the  different  colonies,  without  a  semblance  of 
union  or  cooperation,  each  colony  competing  for  the  lion's 
share  of  the  trade,  a  policy  which  resulted  disastrously  to 
the  peace  of  the  empire. 

In  1755  the  English  government,  under  the  influence  of 

1  Franklin's  Works,  ed.  Sparks,  IV,  303-323.  "  I  conceive  that  to 
procure  all  the  commerce  it  will  afford  at  as  little  expense  to  ourselves 
as  \ve  can  is  the  only  object  we  should  have  in  view  in  the  interior 
Country  for  a  century  to  come."  Gage  to  Hillsborout  h,  November  10, 
1770,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  \V.  I.,  vol.  126:  "  This  Traffick  was  the  Prin- 
cipal Benefit  in  View,  in  the  Extent  of  Territory  in  N.  America  made 
by  the  late  1'eace."  Conway  to  Gage,  March  27,  1766,  Conway's 
MS.  letter  book  in  Library  of  Congress.  It  may  lie  noted,  however, 
that  some  members  of  the  government  had  serious  doubts  as  to  this 
policy.  Such  men  as  Shelburne  favored  an  early  opening  of  the  coun- 
try to  coloni/ation.  See  below,  ch.  VI.  Shelburne,  however,  was 
also  convinced  that  the  management  of  the  Indians  and  their  trade 
should  be  considered  first  among  American  affairs.  Calendar  of  Home 
Office  Papers,  1766-1769,  no.  348.  For  a  similar  view  of  Shelburne's 
in  1774  see  Par/.  Hist.,  XVIII,  672. 


TRADE  CONDITIONS 


79 


Halifax,  president  of  the  Board  of  Trade,  took  over  the 
political  control  of  the  Indians,  and  appointed  two  super- 
intendents to  have  charge  of  the  different  nations. 2  A  little 
later,  in  1761 ,  the  purchase  of  Indian  lands  was  taken  out  of 
the  hands  of  the  colonies  and  placed  under  the  control  of 
the  home  government. 3  No  further  change  is  to  be  noted 
until  after  the  issue  of  the  war  was  known,  when  the  whole 
question  was  again  taken  under  consideration.  The  most 
important  step  yet  taken  respecting  the  Indian  and  his 
concomitant,  the  fur  trade,  appeared  in  the  proclamation  of 
1763,  issued  in  October  following  the  treaty  of  cession. 
Some  of  its  provisions  for  the  West  have  already  been  noted. 
In  addition  to  reserving  for  the  present  the  unorganized 
territory  between  the  Alleghany  Mountains  and  the  Missis- 
sippi River  for  the  use  of  the  Indians,  the  government 
guaranteed  the  Indians  in  the  possession  of  these  lands  by 
announcing  in  the  proclamation  that  no  governor  or  com- 
mander-in-chief  would  be  allowed  to  make  land  grants 
within  this  territory,  and  further  prohibited  all  land  pur- 
chases and  the  formation  of  settlements  by  private  indi- 
viduals without  royal  consent.  Trade  within  this  reserva- 
tion was,  however,  made  free  to  all  who  would  obtain  a 
license  from  the  governor  or  ccmmander-in-chief  of  the 
colony  in  which  they  resided. 4 

The  Indian  trade  now  came  to  be  regarded  as  British 
rather  than  colonial,5  since  its  management  was  now 
directed  by  the  central  government.  In  the  course  of  the 

2  Alvorcl,  "  Genesis  of  the  Proclamation  of  1763",  in  Mich.  Pioneer 
and  Hist.  Colls.,  XXXVI,  25. 

*  Ibid. 

*  Can.  Const.  Docs.,  1759-1791,  122. 

6  Johnson  to  Lords  of  Trade,  May  17,  1759,  N.  Y.  Col.  Docs.,  VII, 
375.  Franklin  pointed  out  the  same  thing  in  1766.  Franklin's 
Works,  ed.  Biglow,  III,  429. 


8o  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

year  following  the  issuance  of  the  proclamation  an  elaborate 
plan  was  outlined  by  Hillsborough 6  comprehending  the 
political  and  commercial  relations  of  all  the  Indian  terri- 
tory. 

According  to  the  proposed  scheme 7  British  North  Amer- 
ica was  to  be  divided,  for  purposes  of  Indian  management, 
into  two  districts,  a  northern  and  a  southern,  each  under 
the  control  of  a  general  superintendent  or  agent  appointed 
by  the  crown,  the  Ohio  River  being  designated  as  the  ap- 
proximate line  of  division.  In  the  northern  district,  with 
which  we  are  here  concerned,  the  regulation  of  such  Indian 
affairs  as  treaties,  land  purchases,  questions  of  peace  and 
war,  and  trade  relations  was  to  be  given  into  the  hands  of 
the  superintendent  who  was  to  be  entirely  free  from  outside 
interference.  Without  his  consent  no  civil  or  military  officer 
could  interfere  with  the  trade  or  other  affairs  of  any  of  the 
Indian  tribes.  Three  deputies  were  to  be  appointed  to 
assist  the  superintendent  and  at  each  post  a  commissary,  an 
interpreter,  and  a  smith  were  to  reside,  acting  under  the 
immediate  direction  of  the  superintendent  and  responsible 
only  to  him  for  their  conduct.  For  the  administration  of 
justice  between  traders  and  Indians  and  between  traders 
themselves,  the  commissary  at  each  post  was  to  be  empow- 
ered to  act  as  justice  of  the  peace  in  all  civil  and  criminal 
cases.  In  civil  cases  involving  sums  not  exceeding  ten 
pounds  the  commissary  was  to  have  summary  jurisdiction, 
but  an  appeal  might  be  taken  to  the  superintendent. 
The  Indian  trade  was  to  be  under  the  direct  supervision  of 
the  general  superintendent.  Traders  who  desired  to  go 
among  the  Indians  to  ply  their  trade  could  do  so  by  obtain- 
ing a  license  from  the  province  from  which  they  came. 

6  See  above,  ch.  II,  pp.  16-17. 

7  Can.  Arch.  Report,  1904,  242;   N,  Y.  Col.  Docs.,  VII,   637-641. 


TRADE  CONDITIONS  81 

The  region  into  which  the  traders  intended  to  go  was  to  be 
clearly  defined  in  the  license  and  each  had  to  give  bond  for 
the  observance  of  the  laws  regulating  the  trade.  The  super- 
intendent, together  with  the  commissary  at  the  post  and  a 
representative  of  the  Indians,  was  to  fix  the  value  of  all 
goods,  and  traders  were  forbidden  to  charge  more  than  the 
price  fixed.  For  the  still  better  regulation  of  the  trade,  it 
was  to  be  centered  about  the  regularly  fortified  and  gar- 
risoned forts.  Regulations  for  the  sale  of  land  were  also 
proposed  :  outside  the  limits  of  the  colonies  no  individual 
or  company  could  legally  purchase  land  from  the  Indians 
unless  at  a  general  meeting  of  the  tribe  presided  over  by  the 
superintendent. 

The  plan  thus  outlined  by  the  ministry  was  never  carried 
into  effect  by  parliamentary  action,  although  the  superin- 
dents  used  the  outline  as  a  guide  in  their  dealings  with  the 
Indians. 8  The  original  intention  had  been  to  levy  a  tax  on 
the  Indian  trade  to  defray  the  expense  of  putting  the  scheme 
into  operation,  but  it  was  found  that  the  budget  was  already 
too  greatly  burdened,9  and  the  Stamp  Act  disturbances 
which  followed  illustrated  the  probable  inexpediency  of  im- 
posing such  a  duty. 10 

The  foregoing  considerations  serve  to  indicate  the  im- 
portance which  the  ministry  attached  to  the  Indian  trade  in 
general.  But  what  of  the  trade  in  the  Illinois  country? 
This  region  had  been  one  of  the  great  centers  of  the  Indian 

8  Practically  all  the  provisions  were  adopted  by  the  superintendents, 
"  Representation  of  Lords  of  Trade  on  the  State  of  Indian  Affairs", 
March  17,  1768,  N.  Y.  Col.  Docs.,  VIII,  24. 

'Franklin's  Works,  ed.  Bigelow,  V,  38;  Knox,  Justice  and  Policy 
of  the  Quebec  Act,  39;  "Proposed  Extension  of  Provincial  Limits", 
Can.  Const.  Docs.,  7759-7797,  381;  Johnson  to  Gage,  March  9,  1765, 
Parkman  Coll.,  Pontiac-Miscell.,  1765-1778. 

10  Knox,  Justice  and  Policy  of  the  Quebec  Act,  39. 


82  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

trade  under  the  French  regime  ;  and  in  addition  the  French 
inhabitants  had  been  one  of  the  main  supports  of  New 
Orleans  since  its  foundation  early  in  the  century.  The 
commercial  connection  between  the  Illinois  villages  and  New 
Orleans  had  never  been  broken,  and  at  the  time  of  the  oc- 
cupation of  Illinois  in  1765,  French  fur  traders  and  mer- 
chants still  plied  their  traffic  up  and  down  the  Mississippi 
River.  Now  that  the  title  to  this  trade  centre  had  passed 
to  England  it  was  expected  that  the  volume  of  trade  would 
be  turned  eastward  up  the  Ohio  River.  The  necessity  for 
this  was  patent  if  any  material  benefits  were  to  accrue  to 
the  empire  from  the  cession,  for  failure  to  carry  out  the  plan 
would  leave  the  country  a  dead  weight  on  the  empire. 

The  home  and  colonial  authorities  early  saw  the  import- 
ance of  turning  the  course  of  the  trade.  They  hoped  and 
expected  that  a  trade  would  be  opened  with  the  Indians  in 
and  about  the  Illinois  country  immediately  after  the  active 
occupation  by  the  English  troops.  u  A  large  number  of 
individual  traders  were  early  aware  of  this  and  representa- 
tives of  some  of  the  large  trading  companies  of  the  East 
were  also  preparing  to  take  advantage  of  the  opening  of  the 
West  to  trade.  In  1765  Fort  Pitt  became  the  great  rendez- 
vous for  this  element.  From  this  point  traders,  with  their 
cargoes  to  exchange  for  the  Indians'  furs,  followed  the  army 
to  Fort  de  Chartres  as  soon  as  the  season  of  the  year  would 
permit. 

Among  the  more  prominent  figures  was  George  Morgan, 
a  member  of  the  firm  of  Baynton,  Wharton  and  Morgan, 
and  the  company's  personal  representative  in  the  Illinois 
country.  Other  representatives  of  the  company  left  Fort 
Pitt  in  March  of  the  same  year  with  a  large  cargo  of  goods, 

11  Johnson  to  Governor  Penn,  April  12,  1765,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol. 
X,  no.  190. 


TRADE  CONDITIONS  83 

which  reached  Fort  de  Chartres  during  the  summer. " 
Firms  such  as  Franks  and  Company  of  Philadelphia  and 
London,  and  Bentley  and  Company  of  Manchac,  on  the 
lower  Mississippi,  also  traded  extensively  in  the  Illinois 
region  during  the  following  years ;  all  the  larger  British 
companies  becoming  rivals  for  that  portion  of  the  Indian 
trade  which  the  English  were  able  to  command.  Other 
and  perhaps  greater  sources  of  profit  to  the  English  mer- 
chants lay  in  the  privilege  of  furnishing  the  garrison  with 
provisions  13  and  the  Indian  department  with  the  goods  for 
Indian  presents.14  Although  the  houses  of  Baynton,  Whar- 
ton  and  Morgan,  and  of  Franks  and  Company  were  usually 
competitors  for  the  former  privilege,  the  latter  company 
generally  had  the  monopoly. 15  On  the  other  hand  Bayn- 
ton, Wharton  and  Morgan  derived  their  greatest  profits 
from  the  sale  of  enormous  quantities  of  goods  to  the  govern- 
ment through  the  Indian  department  for  distribution  among 
the  Indians  accustomed  to  assemble  at  the  Illinois  vil- 
lages. 16  But  whether  all  these  houses  received  profits  com- 
mensurate with  the  risks  undertaken  is  problematical.  » 
In  the  Indian  trade,  in  which  all  the  merchants  were  in- 

12  Five  bateaux  loaded  with  goods  under  the  command  of  John  Jen- 
nings, sailed  from  Fort  Pitt,  March  9,  1765.     Joseph  Uobson  to  Bayn- 
ton, Wharton  and  Morgan,  March  9,  1765,  MS.  letter  in   Hist.  Soc. 
Pa.  Library.     In  1767  the  firm  wrote:   "Our  Speculation  has  been  at- 
tended with  the  most  favorable  circumstances  to  his  Majesty's  Interest, 
As  we  are  the  only  English   Merchants  who  have  ventured  to  forward 
British    Merchandize   to   the  Illinois   Country;    Whereby   the    King's 
Agents  have  been  enabled,  in  some  Degree  to  counteract  the  French 
and  Spanish  on  the  opposite  side  of  the  Mississippi."     Baynton,  Whar- 
ton and   Morgan   to   Macleane,  October  9,  1767,  B.  T.  Papers  (Hist. 
Soc.  Pa.),  vol.  XXVI.  The  best  sources  of  information  for  the  company's 
methods  and  operations  in  the  West  are  Morgan's  MS.  letter  book  and 
the  firm's  papers  in  the  Division  of  Pub.  Records,  Pa.  State  Library. 

13  Morgan's  MS.  letter  book.         H Ibid.         ™  Ibid.         ™  Ibid. 

17  Gage  wrote  in  1770  that  the  "  Company  from  Philadelphia  [Bayn- 
ton, Wharton  and  Morgan]  failed  in  the  Illinois  trade",  Gage  to  Hills- 
borough,  December  7,  1770,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  126. 


84  'I HE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

terested,  they  not  only  had  to  compete  with  each  other  and 
with  independent  English  traders,  but  with  the  French  and 
Spanish  who  had  not  ceased  to  ply  their  trade  among  their 
old  friends  the  Indians.  This  continuance  of  foreign 
traders  in  British  territory  was  probably  the  most  serious 
problem  in  the  trade  situation.  Not  only  did  it  affect  Eng- 
lish traders  but  the  interests  of  the  empire  itself  were  seri- 
ously threatened  by  the  presence  within  its  limits  of  un- 
licensed foreign  traders.  It  is  therefore  evident  that  the 
close  of  hostilities  between  France  and  England  in  1763 
and  the  formal  transfer  of  Canada  and  the  West  to  Great 
Britain  by  no  means  closed  the  intense  rivalry  between  the 
fur- trading  elements  of  the  two  nations  for  predominance 
in  the  western  trade.  It  rather  accentuated  it.  As  has 
already  been  suggested,  France,  until  the  cession  of  the 
West,  had  naturally  possessed  the  dominant  influence 
among  the  savages  of  the  Mississippi  Valley  and  Canada, 
and  consequently  the  monopoly  of  the  fur  trade  accrued  to 
her  subjects.  In  the  upper  Ohio  River  region  and  among 
the  tribes  bordering  on  or  living  within  the  limits  of  the 
English  colonies,  the  British,  during  the  first  half  of  the 
eighteenth  century,  were  either  strong  rivals  of  the  French 
or  were  completely  dominant.  It  was  therefore  generally 
expected  that  after  the  cession  of  the  West  the  British 
would  inherit  the  influence  of  the  French  among  the  Indians 
and  succeed  to  the  monopoly  of  the  fur  trade  just  as  Great 
Britain  had  succeeded  to  the  sovereignty  of  the  territory 
itself.  But  the  conspiracy  of  Pontiac,  due  in  large  part  to 
the  machinations  of  the  French  traders,  postponed  for  a 
considerable  period  the  entry  of  the  British  traders,  during 
which  time  the  French  became  more  strongly  entrenched 
than  ever  in  the  affections  of  the  savages. 

The  French  methods  of  trade   had  from  the  beginning 


TRADE  CONDITIONS  85 

been  different  from  those  pursued  by  their  neighbors  and 
rivals.  The  government  divided  the  Indian  country  into 
districts  corresponding  to  the  divisions  recognized  by  the 
Indians  themselves,  and  licenses  were  adapted  to  the  sev- 
eral ' '  hunts  ' '  with  reference  to  the  customs  and  habits  of 
the  natives.18  Traders  were  absolutely  forbidden  under 
severe  penalties  to  trade  or  hunt  beyond  the  limits  of  their 
respective  districts. 19  The  traders,  moreover,  lived  among 
the  Indians,  affected  their  manners,  treated  them  kindly 
and  respectfully,  and  supplied  all  their  wants,  and  the  mis- 
sionary, the  connecting  link  between  the  two  races,  was 
ever  present.  This  association  of  religion  which  was  one 
of  the  causes  of  the  success  of  the  French  in  gaining  such  a 
permanent  foothold  in  the  affections  of  the  Indians,  was 
entirely  absent  in  the  British  relations  with  that  race.  The 
English  traders  were  in  general  unscrupulous  20  in  their  deal- 
ings with  the  savages  and  deficient  in  that  tact  which  en- 
abled Frenchmen  to  overcome  the  natural  prejudice  of  the 
Indian  and  acquire  an  interest  with  him  which  would  be 
difficult  to  sever.  In  that  section  of  the  Indian  country 
where  the  influence  of  Great  Britain  was  such  that  her 
traders  could  go  among  the  Indians,  there  was  always  con- 
siderable dissatisfaction  on  account  of  the  methods  employed 
by  a  large  number  of  independent  and  irresponsible  traders. 
Many  carried  large  quantities  of  rum ,  some  dealing  in  noth- 
ing else. 21  English  traders  frequently  attended  public 

18Pownall,  Admin,  of  the  Cols.,  187.  ™  Ibid. 

•  20Johnson  to  Hillsborougb,  October  23,  1768,  N.  Y.  Col.  Docs., 
VIII,  105-106;  same  to  Shelburne,  ibid.,  VII,  929;  same,  "Review 
of  the  Trade  and  Affairs  of  the  Indians",  September,  1767,  ibid.,  955, 
960,  964;  same  to  Lords  of  Trade,  ibid.,  987;  Johnson  to  Carleton, 
January  27,  1767,  Can.  Arch.,  series  Q.,  vol.  4,  p.  115. 

81  Johnson  to  Hillsborough,  August  14,  1770,  N.  Y.  Col.  Does., 
VIII,  226.  See  extract  from  "  Ponteach,  or  the  Savages  of  North 
America:  A  Tragedy  ",  in  Parkman,  Conspiracy  of  Pontiac,  II,  344ff. 


86  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

meetings  of  Indians,  gave  them  liquor  during  the  time  for 
business,  and  defrauded  them  of  their  furs. 22  This  abuse 
was  one  of  the  great  causes  of  complaint  against  British 
traders. 23  Indeed  wherever  they  participated  in  the  trade, 
its  condition  was  deplorable.  Many  of  the  independent 
traders  had  little  or  no  credit  so  that  the  legitimate  mer- 
chants suffered  as  well  as  the  Indians. 2*  The  unlicensed 
traders  adopted  various  expedients  to  draw  trade  from  each 
other,  such  as  selling  articles  below  first  cost,  thus  ruining 
a  large  number  of  merchants. 25  Fabrications  dangerous  to 
the  public  were  frequently  created  to  explain  the  prices  and 
condition  of  goods.  w  But  probably  more  injurious  still  to 
imperial  interests,  was  the  fact  that  whole  cargoes  of 
goods  were  sometimes  sold  by  English  firms  to  French  trad- 
ers, thus  enabling  the  latter  to  engross  a  great  part  of  the 
trade,  and  depriving  the  empire  of  the  benefit  of  the  reve- 
nue accruing  from  the  importation  of  furs  into  England. 
This  practice  was  probably  followed  to  a  greater  degree  in 
the  farther  West, 27  where  the  French  continued  to  have  a 
monopoly  in  the  trade  long  after  the  English  occupation. 

It  had  been  expected  that  the  Illinois  villages  would  be 
the  center  of  trade  for  the  English  side  of  the  upper  Mis- 
sissippi Valley 28  just  as  it  had  been  one  of  the  centers  dur- 

22 Johnson  to  Hillsborough,  August  14,  1770,  Ar.  Y.  Col.  Docs., 
VIII,  226. 

23  Johnson  to  Hillsborough,  April  4,  1772,  ibid. ,  292. 

24  Johnson,  "  Review  of  the  Trade  and  Affairs  of  the  Indians  ",  Sep- 
tember, 1767,  ibid.,  VII,  964-965.  ^Ibid.  ™  Ibid. 

27  Gage  to   Shelburne,  January    17,   1767,  B.  T.  Papers  (Hist.  Sor. 
Pa.),  vol.  XXVII;   Johnson  to  Lords  of  Trade,  November  16,  1767, 
N.    Y.  Col.  Docs.,  VII,   776;    Croghan  to  B.   Franklin,   January  27, 
1767,  Sparks  MSS.,  V,  vol.  I,  p.  46.     Croghan,  writing   from  New 
York,  says  that  "persons  here  of  no. inconsiderable  Consequence  sup- 
ply the   French  at  New  Orleans  with  Goods  to  carry  on  their  Contra- 
band Trade  in  the  Illinois  Country."     Ibid. 

28  Lords  of  Trade  to  Johnson,  N.  Y.  Col.  Docs.,  VII,  635. 


TRADE  CONDITIONS  87 

ing  the  French  regime.  But  the  British  were  not  so  well 
situated  to  command  the  trade  as  the  French  had  been. 
Previous  to  this  time  the  trade  of  the  Missouri  River  region 
had  centered  at  the  Illinois  posts,  but  after  the  cession  of 
the  West  to  England  and  the  foundation  of  St.  Louis  by 
Laclede  in  1764,  the  latter  place  drew  all  the  trade  west  of 
the  Mississippi.  Moreover,  except  for  the  few  tribes  of  Illi- 
nois Indians  in  the  immediate  vicinity  very  few  savages 
found  their  way  to  Fort  de  Chartres  for  trading  purposes. 
English  traders,  on  the  other  hand,  did  not  trust  themselves 
far  beyond  this  narrow  circle,29  but  their  French  and 
Spanish  rivals  from  Louisiana,  many  of  whom  formerly 
lived  in  the  Illinois  country,  carried  on  a  trade  in  all  direc- 
tions both  by  land  and  by  water. 30  They  ascended  the 
Ohio,  Wabash,  and  Illinois  rivers31  and  crossed  the  Mis- 

29  "  Information  of  the  Slate  of  Commerce  given  by  Capt.  Forbes, 
1768",  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  VV.  I.,  vol.   125.     General  Gage  declared 
in  1770  that  the  posts  had  failed  as  centers  of  trade.     Gage  to  Hills- 
borough,  November  10,  1770,  ibid.,  vol.  126. 

30  Gordon's  "Journal  down  the  Ohio",  1766,  MS.  in  Hist.  Soc.  Pa. 
Library;   Lieutenant  Geo.  Phyn  to  Johnson,  April   15,  1768,  Johnson 
MSS.,  vol.  XXV,  no.  109.     Morgan  complained  in  1767  that  the  great 
number  of  French  hunters  who  went  up  the  Ohio  from  New  Orleans 
had  almost  exterminated  the  buffalo.     Morgan  to  Baynton  and  VVhar- 
ton,  December  10,  1767,  Morgan's  MS.  letter  book. 

31  Morgan  to  Baynton  and  \Vharton,  December  10,  1767,  Morgan's 
MS.  letter  book;   Gage  to  Shelburne,  April  24,  1768,  P.  R.  O.,  Am. 
and  W.  I.,  vol.   124;    Gage  to  Hillsborough,  April  24,   1768,  ibid. 
Early  in  1768  the  Indians  attacked  a  party  of  Frenchmen  crossing  the 
country  from  Vincennes  with  eight  horses  loaded  with  peltry,  Morgan 
to  Baynton  and  Wharton,  April  10,  1/68,  Morgan's  MS.  letter  book. 
On   April  23,  1768,  Morgan  again  writes:  "A  single   boat   has  just 
arrived  at  Misere  (St.  Genevieve)  loaded  with  Wine,  Taffia  and  Brandy, 

.  .  four  other  Boats  were  to  leave  New  Orleans  Eight  Days  after. 
What  their  Cargoes  consist  of  I  cannot  exactly  learn  but  I  fear  chiefly 
Liquors.  On  their  Arrival  and  their  Cargoes  Will  greatly  depend  the 
Sales  we  shall  make  this  Spring."  MS.  letter  book.  "  They  are  even 
so  impudent  as  to  wear  English  Colours  up  the  Ohio  on  Acct.  of  the 
Cherokees",  Morgan  to  Baynton  and  Wharton,  December  10,  1767, 
ibid. 


88  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

sissippi  River  above  the  Illinois,  plying  their  traffic  among 
the  tribes  in  the  region  of  the  Wisconsin  and  Fox  rivers. 32 
This  was  probably  the  most  productive  area  in  the  Mis- 
sissippi Valley  in  the  supply  of  fur-bearing  animals.  The 
Mississippi  River  northward  from  its  junction  with  the  Illinois 
was  also  considered  especially  good  for  the  peltry  business, 
the  otter,  beaver,  wolf,  cervine,  and  martin  being  found  in 
abundance,33  but  the  British  traders  dared  not  venture  into 
that  quarter. 34  The  loss  of  this  trade,  however,  cannot  be 
attributed  altogether  to  their  misconduct,  for  the  French 
had  never  allowed  it  to  pass  from  their  own  hands.  The 
latter  continued  to  intrigue  with  the  Indians  throughout  the 
greater  part  of  this  period  just  as  they  had  done  prior  to 
1765.  As  we  have  seen  they  pointed  out  to  the  savages 
how  they  would  suffer  from  the  policy  of  economy  practised 
by  the  British  government. 35  Thus  by  giving  presents  and 
by  circulating  stories  and  misrepresentations  the  French 
subjects  of  Spain  attempted  to  checkmate  every  move  of 

32 Gage  to  Hillsborough,  November  10,  1770,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W. 
I.,  vol.  125;  Hutchins,  "Remarks  upon  the  Country  of  the  Illinois, 
1771  ",  MS.  in  Hist.  Soc.  Pa.  Library.  It  may  be  noted  that  during 
the  French  regime  the  French -Canadians  traded  extensively  in  this 
region.  See  Gage's  "  Report  on  the  State  of  the  Government  of 
Montreal ",  Can.  Const.  Docs.,  7759-7797,  69-72. 

33  Wilkins  to  Barrington,  December  5,  1769,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W. 
I.,  vol.  125;   Gage  to  Hillsborough,  Ndvember  10,   1770,  ibid.,  vol. 
126. 

34  "  To  ascend  the  Mississippi  or  Illinois  Rivers  with  Goods  would  be 
certain  Death,  so  great  is  the  Influence  of  the  French  there."     Morgan 
to   Baynton   and   Wharton,    December   10,    1767,    MS.   letter   book. 
Lieutenant  Hutchins,  an  English  engineer,  who  spent  a  year  in  the 
Illinois  country,  stated  that  the  "  Peltries  in  general  that  are  sent  from 
the  British  Side  are  obtained  from  the  French  Traders  on  the  Spanish 
Shore,  as  no  Englishman  can  with  safety  venture  among  the  Savages." 
Hutchins,  "  Remarks  upon  the  Country  of  the  Illinois  ",  MS.  in  Hist. 
Soc.  Pa.  Library. 

36  Johnson  to  Carleton,  January  27,  1767,  Can.  Arch.,  series  Q, 
vol.  4,  p.  115. 


TRADE  CONDITIONS  89 

the  English. 36  The  Indians  were  constantly  reminded  of 
bad  designs  on  the  part  of  England,  and  were  encouraged 
with  unauthorized  promises  of  aid  in  case  they  should  take 
up  the  hatchet  in  defense  of  their  hunting  grounds. 37 

This  state  of  affairs  continued  throughout  the  greater 
part  of  the  period,  although  it  was  probably  modified  to 
some  extent  after  1770.  In  answer  to  a  number  of  vig- 
orous protests  from  General  Gage,38  O'Reilly,  the  Spanish 
governor  of  Louisiana,  issued  an  order  to  all  the  com- 
mandants in  that  colony  to  prohibit  the  inhabitants  crossing 
the  river  in  the  pursuit  of  trade  and  whenever  any  excesses 
were  committed  to  give  satisfaction  to  the  English  com- 
mandant according  to  the  laws  of  nations. 39 

During  the  first  years  of  the  British  occupation  there  was 
considerable  friction  in  the  contact  of  the  two  alien  peoples 
in  the  Illinois  villages.  In  spite  of  the  fact  that  the  French 
who  remained  became  subjects  of  Great  Britain  sharp  com- 
petition existed  for  several  years  between  the  English  and 
French  residents  in  the  vicinity  of  the  villages.40  The  latter 
were  on  terms  of  friendship  with  the  savages  and  could  go 

36  Johnson  to  Hillsborough,  February  18,  1771,  N.  Y.  Col.  Docs., 
VIII,  263;  same  to  same,  October  23,  1768,  ibid.,  105-106. 

37 Gage  to  Hillsborough,  April  24,  1768,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I., 
vol.  124.  There  was  considerable  apprehension  among  English  offi- 
cials throughout  this  period  lest  the  Indians  should  be  stirred  up  for  an 
attack  upon  Canada.  See  Hillsborough  to  Carleton,  November  4, 
1769,  Can.  Arch.,  series  Q,  vol.  6,  p.  121. 

S8Gage  to  Hillsborough,  April  24,  1768,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I., 
vol.  124;  Gage  to  Shelburne,  April  24,  1768,  Dartmouth  Papers,  Four- 
teenth Report,  Royal  Hist.  MSS.  Com.,  Appendix  X. 

39 Order  of  O'Reilly,  January  27,  1770,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I., 
vol.  126. 

40  "  Information  of  the  State  of  Commerce  in  the  Illinois  Country,  £0  5 
given  by  Captain  Forbes,  1768",  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  125. 
Morgan  informed  his  partners  that  "  a  Number  of  French  Merchants 
have  combined  against  us  and  made  Application  to  Captain  Forbes  and 
offered  to  supply  the  Crown  at  a  much  lower  rate  than  we  do."  April 
5,  1768,  Morgan's  MS.  letter  book. 


9o  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

into  any  part  of  the  country  without  difficulty  and  those 
Indians  who  came  to  Fort  de  Chartres  to  trade  generally 
preferred  to  deal  with  their  trusted  friends.  The  French 
often  carried  the  packs  of  furs  thus  obtained  across  the  river 
to  St.  Louis  or  transported  them  directly  to  the  New  Or- 
leans market.  Although  the  British  merchants  were  oc- 
casionally able  to  pool  their  interests  with  the  French  resi- 
dents, such  cases  were  exceptional  prior  to  1770.  In  that 
year,  however,  General  Gage  informed  the  home  govern- 
ment that  "  the  competition  between  his  Majesty's  old  and 
new  Subjects  is  greatly  abated  and  must  by  degrees  subside , 
for  if  carried  to  extremes  it  would  be  very  prejudicial  to 
both."41 

Naturally  the  large  quantities  of  furs  and  skins  obtained 
by  such  contraband  trade  as  well  as  by  the  French  residents 
of  Illinois  were  taken  directly  to  New  Orleans  and  there 
embarked  for  the  ports  of  France  and  Spain.42  These 
foreign  interlopers,  however,  only  followed  the  route  to 
which  they  had  long  been  accustomed.  On  the  other  hand 
it  was  expected  by  the  government  that  the  traders  who 
carried  English  manufactured  goods  down  the  Ohio  River 
would  return  by  the  same  route  with  their  cargoes  of  peltry 
for  the  purpose  of  transporting  them  to  England.  But  in 
this  the  government  was  disappointed.  English  traders  and 
merchants  followed  the  line  of  least  resistance,  the  route 
down  the  Mississippi  to  New  Orleans.43  Moreover,  the 

"  Gage  to  Hillsborough,  November  10,  1770,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W. 
I.,  vol.  126. 

"Morgan  to  Baynton  and  \Vharton,  December  10,  1767,  Morgan's 
MS.  letter  book.  "The  French  in  open  Day  and  without  the  least 
Ceremony  send  their  Peltries  from  hence  to  New  Orleans  or  to  the  West 
Side  of  the  Mississippi",  ibid. 

43  Gage  to  Shelburne,  January  17,  1767,  B.  T.  Papers  (Hist.  Soc. 
Pa.),  vol.  XXVII. 


TRADE  CONDITIONS  91 

New  Orleans  market  was  attractive,  for  peltries  sold  at  a 
higher  price  there  than  in  the  British  markets.44  The  ten- 
dency of  the  English  traders  and  merchants  to  follow  this 
course  was  discovered  soon  after  the  occupation.45  In  a 
communication  to  Secretary  Shelburne  in  1766  Gage  in- 
formed the  government  that ' '  It  is  reported  that  the  Traders 
in  West  Florida  carry  most  of  their  Skins  to  New  Orleans, 
where  they  sell  them  at  as  good  a  price  as  is  given  in  Lon- 
don. As  I  had  before  some  Intelligence  of  this,  the  Officer 
commanding  at  Fort  Pitt  had  orders  to  watch  the  Traders 
from  Pensilvania  who  went  down  the  Ohio  in  the  Spring  to 
Fort  Chartres ;  and  to  report  the  quantity  of  Peltry  they 
should  bring  up  the  Ohio  in  the  Autumn.  He  has  just  ac- 
quainted me  that  the  traders  do  not  return  to  his  Post, 
that  they  are  gone  down  the  Mississippi  with  all  their  Furrs 
and  Skinns  under  the  pretense  of  embarking  them  at  New 
Orleans  for  England."46  A  few  weeks  later  he  wrote  again 
in  a  similar  strain  :  ' '  That  Trade  will  go  with  the  Stream  is 
a  maxim  found  to  be  true  from  all  Accounts  that  have  been 
received  of  the  Indian  trade  carried  on  in  that  vast  Tract 
of  Country  which  lies  on  the  Back  of  the  British  Colonies ; 
and  that  the  Peltry  acquired  there  is  carried  to  the  Sea 

44  Gage  to  Shelburne,  December  23,  1766,  ibid.;  Johnson  to  Gage, 
January  29,  1767,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol.  XIV,  no.  35;  Gage  to  Shel- 
burne, February  22,  1767,  B.  T.  Papers  (Hist.  Soc.  Pa.),  vol.  XXII; 
Gage  to  Johnson,  January  25,  1767,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol.  XIV,  no.  28; 
George  Phyn  to  Johnson,  April  15,  1768,  ibid.t  vol.  XXV,  no.  109; 
Gage  to  Dartmouth,  May  5,  1773,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  128. 
Gage  wrote  in  1766  that  skins  and  furs  bore  a  price  ten  pence  per 
pound  higher  at  New  Orleans  than  at  any  British  market.  Gage  to 
Conway,  July  15,  1766,  ibid.,  vol.  122. 

45 Gage  to  Conway,  July  15,  1766,  ibid.  Remarks  of  Gage  on  Bar- 
rington's  plan,  May  10,  1766,  Lansdowne  MSS.,  vol.  L,  pp.  45-61. 

46 Gage  to  Shelburne,  December  23,  1766,  B.  T.  Papers  (Hist.  Soc. 
Pa.),  vol.  XXVII.  In  1767,  George  Morgan  informs  his  partners, 
Baynton  and  \Vharton,  that  he  will  "  send  a  Boat  with  a  few  Packs  of 
Peltry  to  New  Orleans  ".  Morgan's  MS.  letter  book. 


92  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

either  by  the  River  St.  Lawrence  or  River  Mississippi."47 
Gage  seemed  to  believe  that  the  part  which  went  down  the 
St.  Lawrence  would  be  transported  to  England ;  but  that 
the  peltry  passing  through  New  Orleans  would  never  enter 
a  British  port.48  "  Nothing  but  prospect  of  a  superior 
profit  or  force  will  turn  the  Channel  of  Trade  contrary  to 
the  above  maxim."49  "The  Traders  from  these  Colonies 
say  that  it  will  answer  to  carry  Goods  down  the  Ohio,  but 
that  it  will  not  answer  to  return  with  their  Peltry  by  the 
same  Route,  as  they  can  get  to  the  Sea  at  so  much  less  ex- 
pense, and  greater  expedition  by  means  of  the  Rapidity  of 
the  Mississippi,  and  pretend  that  they  have  Ships  at  New 
Orleans  to  transport  their  Peltry  to  England."50  ".  .  . 
the  British  Traders  at  the  Illinois  who  carry  their  goods 
above  three  hundred  miles  by  land  before  they  have  the  con- 
venience of  Water  Carriage  cannot  afford  to  return  the  same 
way  with  the  produce  of  their  Trade."51  In  this  opinion 
Sir  William  Johnson  likewise  concurred. 52  Lieutenant  John 
Phyn,  of  the  British  army,  who  spent  some  time  at  Fort  de 
Chartres  in  1768,  also  declared  that  "  as  long  as  New  Or- 
leans is  in  the  hands  of  another  power,  the  whole  produce 
of  that  country  must  centre  there.  For  our  merchants  will 

*7  Gage  to  Shelburne,  February  22,  1767,  B.  T.  Papers  (Hist.  Soc. 
Pa.),  vol.  XXVII.  Lieutenant-Governor  Carleton  of  Canada  com- 
plained that  owing  to  the  restraints  on  the  fur  trade  in  that  colony,  all 
the  trade  was  going  down  the  Mississippi,  Carleton  to  Johnson,  March 
27,  1767,  Mich.  Pioneer  and  Hist.  Colls.,  X,  222-224. 

48  Gage  to  Shelburne,  February  22,  1767,  B.  T.  Papers  (Hist.  Soc. 
Pa.),  vol.  XXVII.  ™ Ibid. 

50  Gage  to  Shelburne,  January  17,  1767,  B.  T.  Papers  (Hist.  Soc. 
Pa.),  vol.  XXVII,     For  a  similar  view  see  Gage  to  Johnson,  January 
19,   1767,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol.   XIV,  no.   23,  and  Gage  to  Johnson, 
January  25,  1767,  ibid.,  no.  28. 

51  Gage  to  Hillsborough,  November  10,  1770,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and 
W.  I.,  vol.  126. 

52  Johnson  to  Gage,  January  29,  1 767,  Johnson  MSS. ,  vol.  XIV,  no. 
35;   same  to  same,  February  24,  1767,  ibid.,  p.  67. 


TRADE  CONDITIONS 


93 


always  dispose  of  their  peltry  or  whatever  the  country  pro- 
duces, at  New  Orleans  where  they  get  as  good  a  price  as  if 
they  were  to  ship  them  off."  53 

In  1768  some  steps  were  taken  toward  the  better  regu- 
lation of  the  trade.  In  that  year  Captain  Forbes,  the  com- 
mandant at  Fort  de  Chartres,  issued  a  placard  forbidding 
the  traders  to  send  any  peltry  down  the  river  without  in- 
forming the  commandant  of  the  number  of  packs,  and  at 
the  same  time  giving  a  bond  of  two  hundred  pounds  sterling 
that  they  would  land  them  in  a  British  port.54  At  the  same 
time  General  Gage  served  notice  on  Governor  Ulloa  of 
Louisiana  to  prohibit  the  inhabitants  of  that  province  from 
going  up  the  Illinois,  Ohio,  and  Wabash  rivers.  The  com- 
mandant at  Fort  de  Chartres  was  then  given  directions  to 
scour  the  river  with  armed  boats,  and  to  make  prisoners  of 
all  persons  acting  contrary  to  the  order  of  Don  Ulloa  and 
to  carry  them  to  Fort  Pitt.55 

Conditions,  however,  grew  no  better  as  time  went  on. 
In  1773  we  find  Gage  complaining  that  "  the  Trade  of  the 
Mississippi,  except  that  of  the  upper  parts  from  whence  a 
portion  may  go  to  Quebec,  goes  down  that  River ;  and  has, 
as  well  as  everything  we  have  done  on  the  Mississippi  .  .  . 
tended  more  to  the  Benefit  of  New  Orleans  than  of  our- 
selves."66 

An  examination  of  the  customs  returns  for  the  period 

53Phyn  to  Johnson,  April  15,  1768,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol.  XXV,  no. 
109. 

"Forbes  to  Gage,  April  15,  1768,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol. 
124.  This  had  been  advised  before  by  the  trader  and  Indian  agent, 
George  Croghan.  Croghan  to  Franklin,  January  27,  1767,  Lansdowne 
MSS.,  vol.  XLVIII. 

55  Gage  to  Hillsborough,  April  24,  1768,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I., 
vol.  124;  Gage  to  Johnson,  August  14,  1768,  Gage's  Letters. 

56  Gage  to  Dartmouth,  May  5,  1773,  p-  R-  °-»  Am-  and  w-  !•»  vo1' 
128. 


94  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

from  1763  to  1775  indicates  that  the  statements  of  English 
officials  relative  to  the  productivity  of  the  West  were  not 
groundless.  Instead  of  an  increase  in  the  number  and 
value  of  furs  and  skins  imported  into  England  as  a  result  of 
the  French  cession  of  the  great  fur-bearing  regions  of 
Canada  and  the  Northwest,  there  is  a  decided  decrease 
each  year.57  A  diminution  is  likewise  to  be  noted  in  the 
value  of  the  exports  from  Canada  during  the  same  period.58 
It  is  difficult  to  figure  exactly  what  the  loss  to  imperial 
interests  was  under  these  conditions.  Furs  and  skins,  how- 
ever, being  among  the  enumerated  commodities59  some 
loss  certainly  accrued  to  British  shipping  and  to  the  govern- 
ment through  loss  of  the  duty ,  as  well  as  to  English  manu- 
factures. Although  practically  no  peltries  reached  the 
Atlantic  ports  from  the  Illinois  region,  large  quantities 
were  carried  to  New  Orleans.  The  few  who  have  left  any 
estimate  of  the  amount  of  peltries  exported  to  New 
Orleans  agree  in  general  that  from  five  hundred  to  one 
thousand  packs  were  shipped  annually  from  the  Illinois 
country. 60  According  to  the  usual  estimate  five  hundred 

57  The  value,  as  given  in  P.  R.  O. ,  Customs  Accounts,  vols.  64-68, 
of   beaver   skins   exported    from   America    from   Christmas,    1763,  to 
Christmas,  1768,  was  as  follows: 

1764,  £28,067     Si8  1767,  £20,262     S2 

1765,227,801     Sil  1768,  £18,923     Si8 

1766,  £24,657     S  O 

58  The  total  value  of  beaver  skins  exported  from  Canada  in  1764  was 
17,259  pounds  sterling,  and   in   1768  it  was   13,166  pounds  sterling. 
P.  R.  O.,  Customs  Accounts,  vols.  64-68. 

59  Par  I.  Hist.,  VII,  913-916. 

60 "An  account  of  the  exports  from  the  Illinois  from  Sept.,  1769  to 
Sept.,  1770",  in  Hutchins's  "Remarks  upon  the  Country  of  the  Illi- 
nois, 1771  ",  MS.  in  Hist.  Soc.  Pa.  Library: 
From  the  British  Territory : 

Flour  to  New  Orleans,  120,000  weight  which  may  yield  4  Dollars 
pr  Cwt.     Sterling  Lii2o. 

Peltries  550  Packs  which  on  an  average  if  no  damage  happen 


TRADE  CONDITIONS  95 

packs  were  worth  in  New  Orleans  about  five  thousand  five 
hundred  pounds  sterling. 61  At  the  same  time  the  expense 
of  maintaining  the  various  posts  and  the  Indian  department 
was  heavy.  The  Indian  expenses  at  Fort  de  Chartres 
alone  between  September,  1766,  and  September,  1767, 
were  more  than  six  thousand  pounds  sterling. 62  In  the 
following  year  the  expenses  for  nine  months  in  Indian 
affairs,  fitting  out  an  armed  galley  to  prevent  illicit  trade, 
and  in  repairs  on  Fort  de  Chartres  and  new  works  of  de- 
fense in  expectation  of  an  Indian  rupture  exceeded  two 
thousand  pounds  sterling. m 

to  them  may  yield  at  London,  Ten  Pounds  each  Pack.     5,500 
Pounds. 

Total :   Sterling  L  6,620. 

From  the  Spanish  Territory: 

Flour  15,000  Weight  L    150 

Peltries  835  Packs       L  8350 

L  8,500 

Total  value  of  the  Exports  in  the  year  1768:  L  15,120. 

The  merchant  Geo.  Morgan  declared  that  if  proper  regulations  were 
adopted  and  enforced,  3000  packs  per  annum  could  be  procured  on 
the  British  side.  Morgan  tj  Baynton  and  Wharton,  December  10, 

1767,  Morgan's  MS.   letter  book.     In   1763,  8000  packs  of  beaver 
peltry  had   been  exported  from  New  Orleans,  Marsh  to  Haldimand, 
November  20,  1767,  B.  M.,  Add.  MSS.,  21,728. 

61  Hutchins,   "Remarks  upon  the  Country  of  the  Illinois,   1771." 
From  New  Orleans,  where  all  the  western  trade  finally  centered,  it  was 
estimated  that  peltries  worth  between  75,000  and  100,000  pounds  sterl- 
ing were  sent  annually  to  foreign  ports.     Gage  estimated  it  at  80,000 
pounds  sterling,  Gage  to  Shelburne,  January  17,    1767,  B.  T.  Papers 
(Hist.  Soc.  Pa.),  vol.  XXVII.    "New  Orleans  remits  one  hundred  thou- 
sand pounds  Sterling  worth  of  Peltry  annually  to  France  ",  Baynton, 
Wharton  and  Morgan  to  McLeane,  October  9,  1767,  ibid.,\o\.  XXVI. 

62  P.  R.  O.,  Audit  Office,  Declared  Accounts,  bundle  1530,  roll  2, 
Indian  Affairs.     Gage  estimated  Commissary  Cole's  expense   for  the 
same  period  at  ten  thousand  pounds  sterling,  Gage  to  Johnson,  April  4, 

1768,  Gage's  Letters. 

63  Gage  to  Hillsborough,  October  7,   1769,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W. 
L,  vol    125.     In  a  speech  in  the  House  of  Lords  in  1783,  in  which  he 
defended  the  cession  of  the  Northwest  to  the  United  Slates,  Lord  Shel- 
burne declared:  "The  exports  of  this  country  to  Canada,  then,  were 


96  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

There  seems  to  have  been  unanimity  of  opinion  respect- 
ing the  commercial  inutility  of  the  Illinois  and  surrounding 
country  under  existing  conditions.  Effective  though  ex- 
pensive measures  would  have  to  be  taken  to  change  the 
course  of  trade  and  to  expel  foreign  traders.  But  General 
Gage  was  very  doubtful  about  the  probable  efficiency  of  any 
further  regulations.  Early  in  1767  he  declared  that  it 
would  "  not  answer  to  England  to  be  at  much  expense  about 
the  Mississippi  "  so  long  as  better  prices  prevailed  at  New 
Orleans.64*  Secretary  Hillsborough  took  the  same  view  a 
few  years  later,  in  an  argument  against  the  planting  of 
western  colonies  :  "  This  Commerce  cannot  ...  be  use- 
ful to  Great  Britain  otherwise  than  as  it  furnishes  a  material 
for  her  Manufactures,  but  it  will  on  the  contrary  be  prejudi- 
cial to  her  in  proportion  as  other  Countries  obtain  that 

only  140,000  pounds  and  the  imports  were  no  more  than  50,000 
pounds.  Suppose  the  entire  fur  trade  sunk  into  the  sea,  where  is  the 
detriment  to  this  country?  Is  50,000  pounds  a  year  imported  in  that 
article  any  object  for  Great  Britain  to  continue  a  war  of  which  the  peo- 
ple of  England,  by  their  representatives,  have  declared  their  abhorence? 
.  .  .  But  much  less  must  this  appear  in  our  sight,  when  I  tell  Parlia- 
ment, and  the  whole  kingdom,  that  for  many  years  past,  one  year  with 
another,  the  preservation  of  this  annual  import  of  50,000  pounds  has 
cost  this  country,  on  an  average,  800,000  pounds.  I  have  the  vouchers 
in  my  pocket,  should  your  lordships  be  inclined  to  examine  the  fact." 
Par/.  Hist.,  XXIII,  409. 

64  Gage  to  Johnson,  January  19,  1767,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol.  XIV,  no. 
23.  Captain  Forbes,  commandant  at  Fort  de  Chartres  during  part  of 
1768,  wrote  to  Gage :  "  As  I  am  very  sensible  of  the  immense  expense 
this  Country  is  to  the  Crown  and  the  little  advantage  the  public  has 
hitherto  reaped  by  the  trade  with  savages,  and  the  reason  is  that  the 
Inhabitants  have  continued  to  send  their  Peltry  to  New  Orleans  which 
is  shipped  from  thence  for  Old  France  and  all  the  money  that  is  laid 
out  for  the  Troops  and  Savages  is  immediately  sent  to  New  Orleans,  for 
which  our  Subjects  get  French  Manufactures.  I  hope,  Sir,  you  will 
excuse  me  when  I  observe  to  Your  Excellency,  that  the  Crown  of  Great 
Britain  is  at  all  the  expence  and  that  France  reaps  the  advantages." 
Forbes  to  Gage,  April  15,  1768,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  124. 
Commandant  Wilkins  wrote  the  same  year  that  "the  French  of  New 
Orleans  are  the  sole  gainers  in  this  Trade  and  the  public  suffer  greatly 
thereby."  Wilkins  to  Gage,  September  13,  1768,  ibid. 


TRADE  CONDITIONS  97 

material  from  us  without  its  coming  here  first ;  and  whilst 
New  Orleans  is  the  only  Port  for  Exportation  of  what  goes 
down  the  Mississippi,  no  one  will  believe  that  that  town 
will  not  be  the  market  for  Peltry  or  that  those  Restrictions, 
which  are  intended  to  secure  the  exportation  of  that  Com- 
modity directly  to  G.  Britain,  can  have  any  effect  under 
such  circumstances."  65 

The  original  intention  of  the  British  government  had 
been  to  use  Fort  de  Chartres,  on  the  east  bank  of  the  Mis- 
sissippi between  the  Illinois  and  Kaskaskia  rivers,  to  guard 
the  rivers  in  order  to  prevent  contraband  trading.66  But 
its  inefficiency  was  soon  apparent.67  Although  well  con- 
structed ,  its  location  was  not  strategic ;  it  commanded 
nothing  but  an  island  in  the  river.68  An  indication  to  the 
Indians  of  British  dominion 69  and  a  place  of  deposit  for 
English  merchants70  constituted  about  the  sum  total  of  its  effi- 
ciency. In  order  to  make  the  Illinois  country  effective  as 
a  barrier  against  foreign  aggression  and  to  keep  the  trade  in 

65  Hillsborough  to  Gage,  July  31,  1770,  ibid.,  vol.  126. 

66 Gage  to  Shelburne,  April  3,  1767,  ibid.,  vol.  123. 

67 Gage  to  Johnson,  February  8,  1767,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol.  XIV,  no. 
44;  Remarks  by  Gage  on  Barrington's  plan,  May  10,  1766,  Lansdowne 
MSS.,  vol.  L,  p.  53. 

68  "  It  has  not  the  least  command  of  the  River,  owing  to  an  Island 
which  lies  exactly  opposite  to  it,  and  the  Channel  is  entirely  on  the 
other  side  for  a  great  part  of  the  year.     This  is  impassible  from  a  sand 
bar  which  runs  across  even  for  small  boats,  and  the  French  and  Span- 
iards on  the  other  side  pass  and  repass  at  pleasure  with  contraband 
goods,  forcing  an  illicit  Trade,  to  our  great  disadvantage  and  a  certain 
and  very  considerable  loss  to  His  Majesty's  Revenue."     Commandant 
Wilkins  to  Secretary-at-War  Barrington,  December  5,  1769,  P.  R.  O., 
Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  123.     See  also  Morgan  to  Baynton  and  Wharton, 
April  24,  1769,  Division  of  Pub.  Records,  Pa.  State  Library. 

69  Gordon's  "Journal  down  the  Ohio,  1766,"  MS.  in  Hist.  Soc.  Pa. 
Library;  Gage  to  Johnson,  February  8,  1767,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol.  XIV, 
no.  44;   Hillsborough  to  Gage,  July  31,  1770,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W. 
I.,  vol.  126. 

70  Gage  to  Hillsborough,  June  16,  1768,  ibid.,  vol.  124. 


98  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

English  hands,  it  was  necessary  to  adopt  measures  looking 
toward  the  closing  of  those  natural  entrances  into  the 
country,  the  mouths  of  the  Illinois  and  the  Ohio  rivers.71 
Almost  all  the  correspondence  of  the  time  relating  to 
Illinois,  contains  references  to  the  practicability  of  erecting 
forts  at  the  junctions  of  the  Illinois  and  Ohio  rivers  with 
the  Mississippi.  In  most  cases  this  was  insisted  upon  as 
the  only  practicable  measure  to  make  the  country  of 
value.72  Suggestions  were  also  offered  relative  to  the  erec- 

71  Gage    to    Shelburne,    April  3,    1767,    ibid.,  vol.    123;   Johnson, 
"  Review  of  the  Trade  and  Affairs  of  the  Indians,"  loc.  cit.;   Morgan 
to   Baynton    and    Wharton,     December     10,     1767,    Morgan's   MS. 
letter  book.      "  A  Post    up    the  Mississippi  at    or  near   the    Ilinois 
River  might  leave  to  us  the  greater  part  of  the  Trade  that  is  now  car- 
ried to  the  Settlements  on    the  other  side."     Hutchins,    "Remarks 
upon  the  Country  of  the  Ilinois,  1771  ",  MS.  in  Hist.  Soc.  Pa.  Library. 
George  Croghan  wrote :   "  With  respect  to  the  building  some  new  Forts 
there — I  conceive  they  are  indispensably  necessary,  One  at  Jhe  Mouth 
of  the  Illinois  and  one  on  the  Wabashe;  as  they  would  effectually  pre- 
vent the  French  and  Spaniards  from  entering  into  the  Indian  Country 
and  thereby  seducing  the  trade  from  us,  to  France  and  Spain.     Croghan 
to  Franklin,  January  27,  1767,  Lansdowne  MSS.,  vol.  XLVIII,  fol.  135. 

72  Gage  to  Halifax,  August  10,  1765,  Dartmouth  Papers,  Fourteenth 
Report,  Royal  Hist.  MSS.  Com.,  Appendix  X,  p.  17;  Gage  to  Conway, 
July  15,  1766,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  122.     "  As  for  the  Post 
at,  or  near  the.  conflux  of  the  Ohio  and  Mississippi,  I  have  now  that 
affair  under  consideration,  and  sent  the  Chief  Engineer  about  six  weeks 
ago  to  survey  all  that  Country."     Gage  to  Brigadier  Taylor  of  Pensa- 
cola,  June  26,   1766,  B.   M.,  Add.  MSS.,  21,662,  fol.  220.     See  also 
Gordon's  "Journal  down  the  Ohio,    1766",  MS.  in  Hist.  Soc.  Pa. 
Library;  Gage  to  Johnson,  January  25,  1767,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol.  XIV, 
no.  28;   same  to  same,  February  8,  1767,  ibid.,  no.  44;   Gage  to  Shel- 
burne, January  17,  1767,  B.  T.  Papers  (Hist.  Soc.  Pa.),  vol.  XXVII; 
same  to   same,  April   3,   1767,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and   W.  I.,  vol.  123; 
Johnson,  "  Review  of  the  Trade  and  Affairs  of  the  Indians,"  loc.  cit.; 
Morgan    to    Baynton   and    Wharton,   December   10,  1767,  Morgan's 
MS.  letter  book;  Phyn  to  Johnson,  April  15,  1768,  Johnson  MSS.  vol. 
XXV,  no.  109;  Wilkins  to  Gage,  September  13,  1768,  P.  R.  O.,  Am. 
and  W.  I.,  vol.  124;  Wilkins  to  Barrington,  December  5,  1769,  ibia., 
vol.  125;  Gage  to  Hillsborough,  November  10,   1772,  ibid.,  vol.  126. 
The  merchant  Morgan  wrote  from  Fort  de  Chartres  in  1768  that  "  noth- 
ing is  wanting  but  proper  Posts  at  the  Illinois  River,  St.  Vincents  and 
Manchac,  a  Civil  Government  and  encouragement  to  Settlers  from  the 
Frontiers  of  Pennsylvania,  Maryland  and  Virginia  to  make  this  a  most 


TRADE  CONDITIONS  99 

tion  of  a  fort  on  the  Mississippi  river  above  its  junction 
with  the  Illinois  for  the  protection  of  that  section  of  the 
peltry  district.73  Moreover,  projects  were  likewise  proposed 
for  the  establishment  of  proprietary  colonies  on  the  Ohio 
and  Illinois  rivers.'*  Gage  himself  suggested  that  all  the 
French  villages  along  the  Mississippi  be  amalgamated  into 
one  settlement,  which  would  also  be  the  center  of  the  mili- 
tary establishment,  and  from  which  detachments  could  be 
sent  out  to  guard  the  rivers  and  prevent  British  traders 
from  descending  the  stream  to  New  Orleans  and  likewise 
watch  for  foreign  interlopers.75 

At  one  time  it  was  the  hope  of  such  men  as  Gage ,  John- 
son, Haldimand,  and  Hillsborough  that  the  opening  of  the 
Iberville  River  would  prove  feasible,  thus  enabling  English 
vessels  to  reach  the  British  ports  of  West  Florida  through 
lakes  Maurepas  and  Pontchartrain  without  going  by  way  of 
New  Orleans.  This  would  necessitate  the  maintenance  of 
a  post  at  the  junction  of  the  Iberville  and  Mississippi  rivers 
in  order  to  turn  English  boats  into  the  proposed  channel. 
Numerous  surveys  were  made  and  at  one  time  the  work  of 
clearing  the  channel  was  actually  begun.76 

flourishing  Colony.  Without  these  means  taken  'tis  not  worth  keep- 
ing possession  of  as  to  any  immediate  Advantage  resulting  therefrom, 
As  the  English  Nation  is  now  at  the  whole  expence  of  maintaining  the 
Country  and  France  reaps  all  the  benefits  from  the  Trade  ..."  Mor- 
gan's MS.  letter  book. 

73  Gordon's  "Journal  down  the  Ohio,  1766",  MS.  in  Hist.  Soc.  Pa. 
Library;  Morgan  to  Baynton  and  Wharton,  December  10,  1767,  Mor- 
gan's MS.  letter  book.     "  It  is  acknowledged  by  the  French  themselves, 
that  should  a  Settlement  be  made  at  Cape  au  Gres  on  the  Mississippi, 
about  250  miles  above  the  Illinois  river,  those  on  the  French  side  would 
be  ruined  as  it  would  draw  and  intercept  the  Trade  of  the  upper  Miss- 
issippi."    Hutchins,  "Remarks  upon  the  Ilinois  Country,  1771  ",  MS. 
in  Hist.  Soc.  Pa.  Library. 

74  See  below,  ch.  VI. 

75  Gage  to  Hillsborough,  June   16,  1768,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I., 
vol.  124. 

76  Gage  to  Taylor,  June  10,  1766,  B.  M.,  Add.  MSS.,  21,662,  fol. 


TOO  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

None  of  these  projects,  however,  were  ever  adopted. 
One  of  the  principal  reasons  for  this  apparent  neglect  may 
well  be  summed  up  in  a  statement  by  Hillsborough,  who 
appeared  by  1770  to  have  given  up  the  hope  of  any  im- 
mediate advantages  from  the  West.  He  declared  in  that 
year  that  under  existing  conditions  "  Forts  and  Military 
Establishments  at  the  Mouths  of  the  Ohio  and  Illinois 
Rivers ,  admitting  that  they  would  be  effectual  to  the  attain- 
ment of  the  objects  in  view,  would  yet,  I  fear,  be  attended 
with  an  expence  to  this  Kingdom  greatly  disproportionate 
to  the  advantage  proposed  to  be  gained.  .  ."  " 

The  matter  of  expense  was  not  the  only  reason  why  the 
government  refused  to  adopt  any  of  the  schemes  suggested 
for  the  betterment  of  western  conditions.  The  ministry  had 
in  mind  a  different  plan,  which  if  carried  out  would  have 
completely  changed  the  situation.  The  idea  of  the  con- 
quest of  Louisiana  from  Spain  was  kept  in  mind  during  the 
greater  part  of  the  period  under  consideration  and  received 
more  serious  thought  than  perhaps  any  other  western  plan. 
Much  of  the  correspondence  between  Gage  and  Brigadier 
Haldimand,  the  English  commander  in  West  Florida,  re- 
lated to  the  best  method  of  attacking  New  Orleans,  and 
many  official  and  private  letters  also  contained  expressions 

214;  same  to  same,  June  26,  1766,  ibid.;  Taylor  to  Gage,  January  23, 
1767,  ibid.,  21,671;  Gage  to  Haldimand,  March  20,  1767,  ibid., 
21,663,  '°1-  J45  same  to  same,  April  16,  1767,  Can.  Arch.,  series 
B,  vol.  3,  p.  24;  same  to  same,  April  30,  1767,  B.  M.,  Add.  MSS., 
21,663,  f°l-  335  Captain  Home  to  Haldimand,  May  6,  1767,  Can. 
Arch.,  series  B,  vol.  68,  p.  173;  Hillshorough  to  Gage,  July  31,  1770, 
P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  126;  Gage  to  Hillsborough,  November 
IO,  1770,  ibid.;  Gordon's  "  Notes  on  the  Country  along  the  Mississippi 
from  Kaskaskia  in  the  Illinois  to  New  Orleans  ",  MS.  copy  in  Cham- 
paign, 111.,  Pub.  Library;  Hutchins  to  Haldimand,  April  8,  1773,  B. 
M.,  Add.  MSS.,  21,730,  fol.  25;  Pittman,  European  Settlements  on 
the  Miss. ,  ed.  Hodder,  62-63. 

77  Hillsborough  to  Gage,  July  31,  1770,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I., 
vol.  126. 


TRADE  CONDITIONS  101 

favorable  to  such  a  move.78  In  1770-1771,  when  the 
Falkland  Islands  dispute  was  about  to  drag  England  and 
Spain  into  war,  the  opportunity  had  apparently  come  for 
the  proposed  conquest.  Early  in  1771  Secretary  Hills- 
borough  issued  orders  to  Gage  in  New  York  to  mobilize  an 
army  and  prepare  for  an  immediate  descent  upon  New 
Orleans  by  way  of  the  Ohio  and  Mississippi  rivers.79  Gage's 
preparations,  however,  were  never  completed,  for  the  ques- 
tion at  issue  was  settled  peacefully.80 

In  the  beginning  Great  Britain  had  hoped  to  realize  in 
the  development  of  the  fur  trade  one  of  her  chief  returns 
for  taking  over  the  western  country.  But  her  traders  found 
the  French  hard  to  dislodge.  The  character  and  methods 
of  the  French  fur  traders  appealed  to  the  Indians,  and 
England's  failure  to  realize  more  from  the  trade  may  be 
traced  in  part  to  this  cause.  Moreover,  that  portion  of  the 
western  trade  which  went  to  the  English  centered  in  a  large 
degree  in  a  foreign  port.  With  the  means  at  hand  attempts 
were  made  to  check  this  tendency,  and  numerous  plans 
were  projected  to  induce  a  change  of  conditions,  but  no 
expensive  measures  were  undertaken.  The  problem  of  the 
western  trade  confronted  the  ministry  at  a  most  unfortunate 
time,  for  during  the  decade  following  the  treaty  of  Paris 
questions  of  graver  importance  were  arising  and  demanding 
immediate  attention.  The  necessity  became  apparent  of 
increasing  the  revenue  for  purposes  of  imperial  defence 
and  of  colonial  administration,  and  the  question  of  the  re- 
adjustment of  all  the  relations  between  the  mother  country 

78  See,  for  example,  George  Phyn  to  Johnson,  April  15,  1768,  John- 
son MSS.,  vol.  XXV,  no.  109;  Gage  to  Hillsborough,  November  10, 
1770,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  126;  Hillsborough  to  Gage, 
July  31,  1770,  ibid.;  Reasons  for  the  Establishment  of  a  Colony  in 
Illinois,  1766,  B.  T.  Papers  (Hist.  Soc.  Pa.),  vols.  XXVII,  XXVIII. 

"January  2,  1771,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  127. 

80  For  a  fuller  account  of  the  movement  see  below,  ch.  VII. 


102  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

atnd  the  colonies  was  thereby  introduced.  When  the  colo- 
nial opposition  to  Parliamentary  taxation  manifested  itself 
in  the  outcry  against  the  Stamp  Act  and  other  revenue 
measures,  the  expenditure  of  large  sums  of  money  on  new 
projects  was  out  of  the  question.  Instead  of  seeking  new 
schemes  upon  which  to  expend  money,  every  opportunity 
was  seized  upon  to  curtail  expenses.81  We  find  that  not 
only  was  the  plan  for  the  management  of  Indians  outlined 
in  1764  never  put  into  full  operation  because  of  the  added 
financial  burden  which  it  would  entail,  but  also  that  in  1768 
the  management  of  the  trade  was  transferred  from  the 
crown  to  the  colonies82  in  order  that  the  budget  might  be 
further  reduced.  The  western  question  had  become  sub- 
ordinated to  that  of  the  empire.  Furs  were  important  to 
the  manufacturing  monopoly  of  Great  Britain,  but  at  this 
time  of  rising  discontent  in  the  colonies  any  new  projects 
entailing  further  expense  were  out  of  the  question. 

81  The  following  extract  from  a  letter  of  General  Gage  to  Brigadier 
Taylor  of  Pensacola,  illustrates  something  of  the  situation:   "I  have 
no  doubt  of  the  Exactitude  or  Necessity  of  the  Expenses  incurred,  and 
would  beg  you  to  believe  so,  but  the  strictest  Oeconomy  is  become  the 
general  Topick,  and  is  recommended  in  every  letter  I   receive  from 
Home;   in  Compliance  therewith,  It's  my  part  to  notify  the  several 
Military  Commanders  what's  hoped  for,  and  expected  by  His  Majesty's 
Ministers  .  .  . ;  Estimates  of  the  probable  Expences  of  every  Department 
have  been  expected  in  almost  every  Letter,  and  imply  no  more,  than 
that  a  Calculation  may  be  made  therefrom,  of  the  necessary  Expences 
of  North  America,  which  being  laid  before  Parliament,  a  Fund  may  be 
appropriated   for  the  same.  .  ."  March  20,  1767,  B.  M.,  Add.  MSS., 
21,663,  fol.  12. 

82  Hillsborough  to  Johnson,  April  15,  1768,  N.   Y.  Col.  Docs.,Vlll, 
57-58.     In  this  letter  the  secretary  announced  the  new  plan,  and  de- 
clared that  it  was  due  largely  to  the  necessity  of  curtailing  expenses. 
Alvord,  ///.  Hist.  Colls.,  II,  xxix,  misinterprets  this  measure.     He  says 
it  was  done   for  the  purpose  of  turning  the  channel  of  trade  up  the 
Ohio.     Within  a  year  it  was  evident  that  this  change  made  conditions 
worse.     The  Indians  were  aggrieved  because  of  the  removal  of  the 
commissaries  and  interpreters,  and  the  trade  conditions  in  the  interior 
country  became  worse  through  lack  of  supervision.     See  Johnson  to 
Hillsborough,  August  26,   1769,  N.   Y.  Col.  Docs.,  VIII,  184. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

SCHEMES  FOR  THE  COLONIZATION  OF  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY, 
1763-1768. 

THE  first  step  in  the  establishment  of  British  colonies 
west  of  the  Alleghany  Mountains  was  in  1738,  when  the 
assembly  of  the  colony  of  Virginia  established  Augusta 
County,  with  the  Blue  Ridge  Mountains  as  the  eastern 
boundary  and  the  "utmost  limits  of  Virginia"  as  the 
western  and  northwestern.1  In  spite  of  French  claims  to 
this  region,  the  old  sea-to-sea  charters  still  possessed  a  po- 
tential value  in  the  minds  of  the  colonists,  and  from  this 
time  on  there  was  a  steady  move  westward.  Gradually,  to- 
ward the  middle  of  the  century ,  the  more  enterprising  and 
farsighted  of  the  colonists  who  appreciated  the  future  value 
of  the  region  began  to  lay  plans  for  its  systematic  exploita- 
tion. In  1748,  shortly  after  the  peace  of  Aix-la-Chapelle, 
the  Ohio  Company,  composed  of  London  merchants  and 
Virginia  land  speculators,  obtained  from  the  crown  a  grant 
of  land  south  of  the  Ohio  River.  This  was  the  precursor 
of  several  companies  formed  for  similar  purposes.  In  1754 
the  question  of  western  expansion  had  become  of  sufficient 
importance  to  engage  the  attention  of  the  Albany  Congress 
and  plans  for  the  creation  of  western  colonies  were  discussed 
by  that  body.2  The  following  year  Samuel  Hazard  of 

1  Alden,   New   Governments    West  of  the  Alleghanies  before  ij8o 
(University  of  Wisconsin  Bulletin,  vol.  II,  no.  i),  i. 

2  Ibid.,  1—3.     No  attempt  is  made  in  this  study  to  add  any  new  con- 

103 


104  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

Philadelphia  outlined  a  proposition  looking  toward  the 
formation  of  a  western  colony,3  probably  the  first  which 
comprehended  the  Illinois  country. 

The  treaty  of  cession  in  1763  gave  a  new  impetus  to  the 
colonizing  spirit  which  had  lain  dormant  during  the  early 
years  of  the  war.  The  English  now  believed  that  they 
were  free  to  occupy  at  will  the  unsettled  lands  as  far  west- 
ward as  the  Mississippi  River.  Pamphlet  literature  was 
printed  and  disseminated  throughout  England  and  America 
from  1763  on,  advocating  the  feasibility  and  necessity  of 
settling  the  new  lands.  Soon  after  the  conclusion  of  peace 
there  appeared  in  Edinburgh  a  pamphlet  entitled  The  Ex- 
pediency of  securing  our  American  Colonies  by  settling  the 
country  adjoining  the  River  Mississippi,  which  pointed  out 
the  expediency  of  locating  a  colony  between  the  Ohio  and 
Mississippi  rivers  and  the  fresh-water  lakes  to  the  north- 
ward. Such  a  colony,  the  author  set  forth,  would  give 
Great  Britain  command  of  the  continent,  would  serve  as  a 
protection  against  the  incursions  of  French  and  Indians, 
and  secure  the  fur  trade  of  the  Northwest. 4  The  govern- 
ment was  urged  to  encourage  settlers  by  giving  lands  on 
easy  tenure,  and  by  furnishing  cattle,  tools,  and  other 
necessaries.  The  colonists  should  also  be  given  "  a  set  of 
well  contrived  good  rules  with  respect  to  their  constitution, 
policy,  economy  and  order,  wise  prudent  Governors,  and  a 
sufficient  number  of  able  approven  Clergymen  and  teach- 
ers." 5  There  were  doubtless  many  other  pamphlets  issued 

tribution  to  the  period  preceding  1763.  Mr.  Alden's  monograph  in- 
cludes an  account  of  all  the  projects  during  that  period,  such  as 
Hazard's,  Pownall's,  and  Franklin's  earlier  plan. 

8Alden,  New  Governments  West  of  the  Alleghanies  before  1780, 
7-1 1.  ''Ibid.,  16. 

6  Expediency  of  Securing  our  American  Colonies,  43.  For  a  sum- 
mary of  other  details  see  Alden,  New  Governments  West  of  the  Alle- 
ghanies, 14. 


SCHEMES  FOR  COLONIZATION  105 

during  the  period  of  land  fever,  descriptive  of  the  new 
country  and  its  possibilities,  of  which  we  have  no  record.6 
Throughout  the  colonies  and  in  England  many  of  the 
leading  men  as  well  as  the  more  venturesome  pioneers  on 
the  borders  of  New  York,  Pennsylvania,  and  Virginia  were 
ready  to  take  an  active  hand  in  the  exploitation  of  the  rich 
lands  lying  to  the  westward.  Early  in  the  summer  of  1763, 
before  the  British  ministry  had  had  time  to  consider  and 
determine  upon  its  policy  toward  the  new  acquisitions,  there 
was  formed  an  organization  known  as  the  Mississippi  Land 
Company , 7  for  the  purpose  of  planting  a  colony  in  the 
Illinois  and  Wabash  regions.  In  this  project  some  of 
the  most  prominent  residents  of  Virginia  and  Maryland 
were  directly  interested ;  indeed ,  membership  in  the  organi- 
zation was  drawn  almost  entirely  from  those  two  colonies 
and  from  England.  Some  of  the  original  members  of  the 
company  were  George,  Samuel,  and  John  Washington  ;  the 
Lees — William ,  Thomas ,  Francis  Lightf oot,  Richard  Henry , 
and  Arthur ;  Henry  and  William  Fitzhugh ,  Presly  Thorn- 
ton, and  Benedict  Calvert.8  There  were  thirty-eight  sub- 

6 In  this  connection  the  following  is  of  interest:  "  As  the  happy  pos- 
session of  the  Illinois  Country  is  the  Subject  of  much  conversation,  both 
in  England  and  America,  we  beg  leave  to  inclose, — a  small  pamphlet, 
wrote  lately,  on  a  very  interesting  point — to  wit,  The  Establishment  of 
a  Civil  Government  there.  The  Author  has  borrowed  some  of  his  Sen- 
timents from  De.  Pratz."  Baynton,  Wharton  and  Morgan  to  Sir  Wil- 
liam Johnson,  March  30,  1766,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol.  XII,  no.  128. 

7  Original  Articles  of  Agreement  of  the  Mississippi  Company,  P.  R. 
O. ,  Chatham  Papers,  vol.  97.     Another  copy,  in  the  handwriting  of 
George  Washington,  is  in  the  Library  of  Congress.     This  has  recently 
been  printed  by  A.  B.  Hulbert  in  Ohio  Arch,  and  Hist.  Publications, 
XVII,  436-439.     Most  of  the  information  concerning  the  proposition 
comes  from  a  collection  of  papers  relating  to  the  company  and  its  trans- 
actions, all  in  the  handwriting  of  William  Lee,  which  was  found  in  a 
miscellaneous  collection  of  the  Earl  of  Chatham's  papers,  in  the  Public 
Record  Office. 

8  Original  Articles  of  Agreement  of  the  Mississippi  Company,  P.   R. 
O. ,  Chatham  Papers,  vol.  97. 


lo6  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

scribers  to  the  agreement,  but  the  company  was  eventually 
to  be  composed  of  fifty  members  who  were  to  contribute 
equally  towards  the  maintenance  of  an  agent  in  England.9 
To  this  agent  was  intrusted  the  duty  of  soliciting  from  the 
crown  a  grant  of  two  million  five  hundred  thousand  acres 
of  land  on  the  Mississippi 10  and  its  tributaries ,  the  Wabash 
and  Ohio  rivers,  including  not  only  the  so-called  Illinois 
country  of  that  time ,  but  the  western  portion  of  the  present 
States  of  Kentucky  and  Tennessee.11 

In  their  petitions  the  memorialists  enumerated  the  ad- 
vantages which  would  accrue  to  the  empire  in  case  the  land 
were  granted ,  especial  emphasis  being  laid  on  two  points  of 
view,  commerce  and  defense.  "The  Increase  of  the  peo- 
ple, the  extension  of  trade  and  the  enlargement  of  the 
revenue  are  with  certainty  to  be  expected,  where  the  fer- 
tility of  the  soil,  and  mildness  of  the  Climate  invite 
emigrants  (provided  they  can  obtain  Lands  on  easy  terms) 

9  Ibid.     The  first  agent  in  London  was  Thomas  Gumming,  who  was 
also  a  stockholder    in  the  company,  Memorial  to  the  Crown,  Septem- 
ber 9,  1763,  ibid.     Cumming's  successor  was  Arthur  Lee,  Petition  to 
the  Crown,  December  12,  1768,  ibid.,  printed  in  Butler,  Hist,  of  Ky., 
381-383;  see  also  petition  of  company  in  Privy  Council  Office,  Unbound 
Papers,  1768. 

10  Memorial  to  the  Crown,  prepared  at  a  meeting  of  the  company  at 
Belleview,  Va. ,  September  9,  1763,  P.  R.  O.,  Chatham  Papers,  vol. 
97,  printed  below  in  the  Documentary  Appendix,  no.  I. 

11  For  the  boundaries  of  the  proposed  grant,  see  below,  Documentary 
Appendix,  no.  i.     The  original  articles  of  agreement  do  not  give  the 
exact  location  of  the  proposed  grant.     The  subscribers  were  to  be  free 
to  retain  their  lands  twelve  years,  or  more  at  the  pleasure  of  the  crown, 
without  the  payment  of  taxes  or  quit  rents.     Within  the  same  period 
also  the  company  was  to  be  obliged  to  settle  two  hundred  families  in 
the  colony,  unless  prevented  by  Indians  or  a  foreign  enemy.     In  order 
to  insure  against  any  such  interruption  it  was  hinted  that  the  govern- 
ment might  establish  and  garrison  two  forts,  one  at  the  confluence  of 
the  Cherokee  and  Ohio  rivers,  and  the  other  at  the  mouth  of  the  Ohio. 
Memorial  to  the  Crown,  Documentary  Appendix,  no.  i.     The  last  sug- 
gestion was  withdrawn  four  years  later  at  the  suggestion  of  their  Lon- 
don agent,  Thomas  Gumming.     Letter  of  the  company  to  Gumming, 
March  I,  1767,  P.  R.  O.,  Chatham  Papers,  vol.  97. 


SCHEMES  FOR  COLONIZATION  107 

to  settle  and  cultivate  commodities  most  wanted  by  Great 
Britain  and  which  will  bear  the  charges  of  a  tedious  naviga- 
tion, by  the  high  prices  usually  given  for  them, — such  as 
Hemp,  Flax,  Silk,  Wine,  Potash,  Cochineal,  Indigo,  Iron, 
etc.,  by  which  means  the  Mother  Country  will  be  supplied 
with  many  necessary  materials,  that  are  now  purchased  of 
foreigners  at  a  very  great  expense."  12 

From  the  point  of  view  of  both  trade  and  defense,  the 
company  proposed  "  that  by  conducting  a  trade  useful  to 
the  Indians  on  the  borders  of  the  Mississippi  they  will 
effectually  prevent  the  success  of  that  cruel  policy,  which 
has  ever  directed  the  French  even  in  time  of  peace,  to 
prevail  with  the  Indians  their  Neighbors  to  lay  waste  the 
frontiers  of  Your  Majestic 's  Colonies  thereby  to  prevent 
their  increase."  13 

Lastly  the  establishment  of  a  buffer  colony  would  effec- 
tually prevent  the  probable  encroachment  of  the  French 
from  the  west  side  of  the  Mississippi  and  cut  off  their  politi- 
cal and  commercial  relations  with  the  Indians.  They  would 
' '  thereby  be  prevented  from  instigating  them  to  War ,  and 
the  harrassing  the  frontier  Counties  as  they  have  constantly 
done  of  all  the  Colonies."  w 


12  Memorial  to  the  Crown,  Documentary  Appendix,  no.  i.     Some  of 
the  members  declared  their  intention  of  becoming  early  settlers  in  the 
new  colony.     The  richness  of  the  soil  and  mildness  of  the  climate  be- 
yond the  mountains,  coupled  with  the  "  dearness  and  preoccupancy  of 
the  lands,  within  their  respective  colonies"  which  rendered  it  "im- 
practicable to  make  a  proper  landed  provision  for  their  numerous  fami- 
lies;   a  circumstance  which  begins  already  to  restrain  early  marriage, 
and  therefore  speedy  population  ",  were  set  forth  as  reasons  for  their 
determination,  Petition  to  the  Crown,  December  16,  1768,  printed  in 
Butler.  Hist,  of  Ky. ,  381-383.     It  may  be  noted  that  no  suggestion  is 
made  with  reference  to  the  form  of  government  for  the  proposed  colony. 

13  Memorial  to  the  Crown,  Documentary  Appendix,  no.  i. 

14  Letter  of  the  company  to  Thomas  Cumming,  September  26,  1763, 
P.  R.  O. ,  Chatham  Papers,  vol.  97. 


io8  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

The  plan  received  its  first  official  check  in  the  year  of 
its  inception,  when  in  October,  1763,  the  British  ministry 
announced  its  western  policy  in  a  proclamation  according 
to  which  all  the  territory  lying  north  of  the  Floridas  and 
west  of  the  Alleghanies  was  reserved  for  the  use  of  the  In- 
dians.15 Thereafter  the  colonial  governors  were  forbidden 
to  issue  patents  for  land  within  this  reservation  without  the 
consent  of  the  crown.16  However,  the  enunciation  of  this 
policy  did  not  deter  the  Mississippi  Land  Company  and 
similar  organizations  from  pressing  their  claims  upon  the 
Board  of  Trade.  The  more  farsighted  of  the  Americans 
had  probably  correctly  interpreted  the  proclamation  as  tem- 
porary in  character  and  as  promulgated  to  allay  the  minds 
of  the  savages.  "  The  Mississippi  Company  therefore  con- 
tinued to  solicit  the  grant  until  1769,  when  it  was  decided 
that  on  account  of  the  temper  of  the  ministry  towards 
America,  it  would  be  advisable  to  drop  the  affair  for  a  time 
in  the  hope  that  a  change  of  ministry  would  bring  a  cor- 

15  Can.  Const.  Docs.,  7759-7797,  122.     See  also  above,  ch.  II,  pp. 

16  Ibid. 

17  "  I  can  never  look  upon  that  proclamation  in  any  other  light  (but 
this  I  say  between  ourselves),  than  as  a  temporary  expedient  to  quiet 
the  minds  of  the   Indians,  and  must   fall,  of  course,  in  a  few  years, 
especially  when  those   Indians  are  consenting  to  our  occupying  the 
lands."     Washington  to  Crawford,  September  21,  1767,   Writings  of 
Washington,  ed.  Ford,  II,  220-221.     The    report    of   the  Board  of 

Trade  on  Indian  affairs  in  1769  admitted  these  claims  to  be  "mere 
provisional  arrangements,  adopted  to  the  exigence  of  the  time."  Pa. 
Archives,  IV,  315.  The  same  opinion  is  expressed  in  "  Remarks  on 
Lord  Barrington's  Plan,  no.  2  "  (1766),  Lansdowne  MSS.,  vol.  L,  p. 
78.  For  an  extreme  example  of  the  notion  held  by  some  members  of 
the  government  that  the  proclamation  of  1763  should  be  strictly  ad- 
hered to  and  that  all  western  military  posts  should  be  abandoned  and  a 
general  restrictive  policy  toward  the  West  adopted,  see  Lord  Barring- 
ton's  Plan  relative  to  the  Out  Posts,  Indian  Trade,  etc.,  10  May,  1766, 
Lansdowne  MSS.,  vol.  L,  pp.  49-61.  Barrington,  who  was  Secretary 
at  War,  reveals  a  remarkable  ignorance  of  western  affairs. 


SCHEMES  FOR  COLONIZATION 


109 


responding  change  of  policy.18  But  at  no  time  does  it 
appear  that  the  promoters  of  the  colony  received  the 
slightest  encouragement  from  those  in  authority.19 

About  the  time  of  the  organization  of  the  Mississippi 
Company  in  1763,  General  Charles  Lee 20  outlined  a  scheme 

18  Letter  to  William  Lee,  London,  May  30,  1769,  P.  R.  O.,  Chat- 
ham Papers,  vol.  97. 

19  No  account  of  any  further  activity  on  the  part  of  the  company  has 
been  found.     In  1774  a  copy  of  the  correspondence  was  sent  to  the 
Earl  of  Chatham,  which  may  have  been  done  in  the  hope  that  his  in- 
terest might   be  aroused  in  the  undertaking.     The  bundle  of  papers 
contains  the  following  indorsement:   "  Mississippi  Co3.  Papers,  sent  to 
the  Right  Honble  William  Earl  of  Chatham,  on  Saturday  the  2Oth  of 
April    1774."     Charles  Lee,  in  speaking  of   this  undertaking,  said: 
"  Another  society  solicited  for  lands  on  the  lower  part  of  the  Illinois, 
Ohio  and  on  the  Mississippi:  this  was  likewise  rejected;   but  from  what 
motives  it  is  impossible  to  define,  unless  they  suppose  that  soldiers  in- 
vested with  a  little  landed  property,  would  not  be  so  readily  induced  to 
act  as  the  instruments  of  the  oppression  of  their  fellow  subjects,  as  those 
whose  views  are  solely  turned,  if  not  reduced,  to  farther  promotion; 
and  if  reduced,  to  full  pay."     Lee  Papers,  IV  (N.  Y.  Hist.  Soc.  Colls., 
Fund  series,  VII),  98.     Benjamin  P'ranklin  apparently  knew  nothing 
of  the  existence  of  the  company  until  1768.     lie  states  in  his  famous 
reply   to    Hillsborough,    Works,   ed.    Bigelow,   V,   44:    "Consistent, 
however,  with  our  knowledge,  no  more  than  one  proposition  for  the 
settlement  of  a  part  of  the  lands  in  question  has  been  presented  to 
government  and  that  was  from  Dr.  Lee,  thirty-two  other  Americans, 
and  two  Londoners,  in  the  year  of    1768,  praying  lhat  his  Majesty 
would   grant   to  them  without  any  purchase-money,  two  million  five 
hundred  thousand  acres  of  land,  in  one  or  more  surveys,  to  be  located 
between  the  thirty-eighth  and  forty-second  degree  of  latitude  and  over 
the  Allegheny  Mountains  .    .    .  "     The  company  is  mentioned  in  Con- 
siderations on  the  Agreement  .    .    .  with  the  Honourable  Thomas  Wai- 
pole  .    .    .  ,  25-26,  as  being  comprised  of  "  thirty-three  gentlemen  of 
character  and  fortune  in  Virginia  and  Maryland,  several  of  whom  were 
of  his  Majesty's  council  in  Virginia,  and  many  of  them,  members  of 
the  house  of  assembly,  both  of  that  colony  and  of  the  province  of 
Maryland."     Perkins,  Annals  of  the  West,  130  ;  Sato,  Hist,  of  the  Land 
Question  in  the  U  S.,  25;  H.  B.  Adams,  Maryland's  Influence  upon 
the  Land  Cessions  to  the  U.   S.,   14;  De   Hass,  History  of  the  Early 
Settlement  and  Indian  Wars  of  Western  Virginia,  139,  and  the  author 
of  Plain  Facts,  69,  all  note  the  existence  of  the  company,  but  place  the 
date  of  its  organization  in   1767.     The  first  three  quote  from  Plain 
Facts. 

20  The  Charles  Lee  of  Revolutionary  fame. 


no  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

for  the  establishment  of  two  colonies,  one  on  the  Ohio 
River  below  its  junction  with  the  Wabash ,  and  the  other  on 
the  Illinois  River.21  It  was  his  plan  to  organize  a  company 
and  petition  the  crown  for  the  necessary  grants  of  land.22  A 
portion  of  the  settlers  were  to  be  procured  in  New  England , 
and  the  remainder  from  among  the  Protestants  of  Germany 
and  Switzerland.23  In  narrating  the  probable  advantages 
to  be  derived  from  such  settlements,  Lee  takes  practically 
the  same  point  of  view  as  the  promoters  of  the  Mississippi 
Company,  adding  the  suggestion  that  a  new  channel  of 
commerce  would  be  opened  up  through  the  Mississippi 
River  and  the  Gulf  of  Mexico.2*  This  proposal  suffered 
the  same  fate  as  its  contemporary  in  being  rejected  by  the 
ministry,  whose  policy  of  allowing  no  settlements  in  the 
country  beyond  the  mountains  had  been  too  recently 
adopted.25  Apparently  the  authors  of  these  projects  did 
not  have  the  ear  of  such  members  of  the  ministry  as  Lord 
Shelburne,  whose  general  attitude  gave  some  ground  for 
the  belief  that  in  the  end  plans  for  western  settlements 
would  be  adopted.26 

The  next  definite  schemes  of  which  we  have  knowledge 
appeared  in  1766,  although  it  is  probable  that  there  were 
many  others,27  for  during  those  years  half  of  England  was 

J1  Lee  Papers,  IV,  214;  Draper,  Life  of  Boone  (MS.),  HI,  266; 
Sparks,  Life  of  Charles  Lee,  19. 

22  Lee  Papers,  IV,  214. 

™  Ibid.  ™  Ibid.  ™Ibid. 

26  B.  Franklin  to  W.  Franklin,  September  27  and  October  n,  1766, 
and  June  13,  August  28,  and  November  25,  1767,^1  Franklin's  Works, 
ed.  Bigelow,  IV,  138-144;   Shelburne  to  Gage,  November  14,   1767, 
P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  123. 

27  See  for  example  references  to  Colonel  Bouquet's  proposition  in 
Bouquet  to   Franklin,  August  22,   1764,  Franklin   Papers  (Am.  Phil. 
Soc.),  vol.  I,  no.  94,  summarized  in  Calendar  of  the  Franklin  Papers, 
ed.  Hays,  I,  31.     Among  the  papers  in  the  Lansdowne  collection  are 
a  number  which  discuss  the  matter  in  general  terms. 


SCHEMES  FOR  COL  ONIZA  TION  1 1 1 

said  to  have  been  "  New  Land  mad  and  every  body  there 
has  their  eye  fixt  on  this  Country."2  It  is  hardly  prob- 
able, therefore,  that  the  few  definite  proposals  of  which 
we  have  record  were  the  only  plans  projected  during  those 
years.  Indeed  the  colonial  plan  of  1766,  promoted  by 
prominent  merchants  and  land  speculators  of  New  York, 
Pennsylvania,  and  New  Jersey,  had  its  origin,  we  may 
safely  say,  as  early  as  January,  1764.  At  that  time  the 
Board  of  Trade  received  a  communication  from  one  of  the 
promoters,  George  Croghan,  who  was  then  in  England,29 
asking  their  Lordships  "whether  it  would  not  be  good 
policy  at  this  time  while  we  certainly  have  it  in  our  power 
to  secure  all  the  advantages  we  have  got  there  by  making 
a  purchase  of  the  Indians  inhabiting  the  Country  along  the 
Mississippi  from  the  mouth  of  the  Ohio  up  to  the  sources 
of  the  River  Illinois,  and  there  plant  a  respectable  colony, 
in  order  to  secure  our  frontiers,  and  prevent  the  French 
from  any  attempt  to  rival  us  in  the  Fur  trade  with  the 
Natives,  by  drawing  the  Ohio  and  Lake  Indians  over  the 
Mississippi,  which  they  have  already  attempted  by  the  last 
accounts  we  have  from  Detroit. "  30  In  spite  of  the  recent 
announcement  in  the  proclamation  of  1763  of  the  land 
policy  of  the  government,  which  interdicted  all  settlements 
beyond  the  line  of  the  Alleghanies,  without  royal  consent, 
the  ministry  at  this  time  must  have  been  favorably  im- 

28  Croghan  to  Johnson,  March  30,  1766,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol.  XII, 
no.  127. 

29  Sir  William  Johnson  sent  his  agent  Croghan  to  England  to  sound 
the  ministry  on  the  question  of  the  boundary  between  the  frontier  and 
the  Indian  territory.     Winsor,   Westward  Movement,  9;  cf.  also  N.   Y. 
Col.  Docs.,  VII,  603.     Croghan  was  also  instructed  to  petition  the  gov- 
ernment for  a  grant  of  land  south  of  the  Ohio  to  satisfy  the  claims  of 
the  Ohio  company,  and  of  those  soldiers  whom  Dinwiddie  had  enlisted 
in  1754  with  promises  of  land,  Winsor,  Westward  Movement,  8. 

30 N.  Y.  Col.  Docs.,  VII,  605. 


H2  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

pressed  by  Croghan's  advice,  for  the  latter  informs  us  a  few 
months  later  that  "  there  is  a  talk  of  setleing  a  Colony  from 
the  mouth  of  the  Ohio  to  the  Illinois,  which  I  am  tould 
Lord  Halifax  will  Desier  my  opinion  of  in  a  few  Days.  Mr. 
pownal  tould  me  yesterday  that  I  would  be  soon  sent  for  to 
attend  the  board  of  Trade,  what  Meshures  they  will  Take 
the  Lord  knows,  but  nothing  is  talkt  of  except  Oconomy." 31 
No  further  action,  however,  was  taken  at  this  time.  But 
the  tentative  proposition  thus  suggested  to  the  Board  was 
in  essence  the  same  plan  that  Croghan  and  his  associates 
developed  two  years  later.  In  the  general  outline  of  Cro- 
ghan's earlier  plan  there  is  no  suggestion  that  he  intended 
to  include  the  cultivated  lands  of  the  French  inhabitants  of 
the  Illinois  villages  who  might  leave  that  country  after  the 
occupation  by  the  British.32  Two  years  subsequently,  how- 
ever, Sir  William  Johnson,  Croghan's  superior  in  the  Indian 
department  in  America  and  his  constant  associate  in  colo- 
nizing enterprises,  in  a  communication  to  the  Board  of 
Trade,  gave  as  his  opinion  that  "  some  of  the  present  In- 
habitants may  possibly  incline  to  go  home ,  and  our  Traders 
will,  I  dare  say,  chuse  to  purchase  their  rights,  this  may  be 
the  foundation  for  a  Valuable  Colony  in  that  Country,  .  .  . 
this  may  be  effected  in  time,  and  large  concessions  ob- 
tained of  the  Natives."  33  The  idea  of  basing  a  colony  in 

31  Croghan  to  Johnson,  March  10,  1764,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol.  VIII, 
no.    202.     The  style  of  the  letter  is  characteristic  of  Croghan.     His 
official  letters,  however,  were  usually  put  into  form  by  some  one  else. 

32  Later,  however,  he  adopted  that  idea,  Croghan  to  Johnson,  March 
30,  1766,  Johnson   MSS.,  vol.  XII,  no.  127, 

3S  Johnson  to  Lords  of  Trade,  JamTary  31,  1766,  A7".  Y.  CoL  Docs., 
VII,  809.  When  Croghan  was  preparing  to  go  to  flie  Illinois  villages 
in  1766  to  bring  about  a  general  pacification  of  the  Indians,  Johnson 
wrote  him:  "  So  soon  as  I  hear  farther  from  the  General  [Gage]  I 
shall  write  you  and  send  the  Instructions  in  which  I  shall  insert  an 
Article  directing  you  to  enquire  into  the  French  Bounds  and  Property 
at  the  Illinois.  I  have  no  objection  to  what  you  propose  on  that  sub- 


SCHEMES  FOR  COL  ONIZA  TION  1 1 3 

part  upon  lands  vacated  by  the  French  was  also  taken  up 
and  emphasized  a  few  weeks  later  by  General  Gage. 

Very  early  in  the  period  of  the  British  occupation  of  the 
West  the  chief  representatives  of  the  military  department, 
upon  whom  devolved  the  responsibility  of  governing  the 
territory,  became  exceedingly  embarrassed  on  account  of 
the  immense  expense  which  the  department  was  called 
upon  to  meet  in  providing  for  the  maintenance  of  garrisons 
among  the  French  inhabitants  scattered  throughout  the 
Indian  country.  In  1766,  the  year  of  the  repeal  of  the 
Stamp  Act,  the  imperial  government  was  conscious  not 
only  of  the  necessity  of  maintaining  in  America  a  force 
sufficient  to  put  down  a  probable  uprising  of  the  Indians 
and  to  guard  the  country  against  French  encroachments, 
but  also  of  the  obligation  to  curtail  expenses.  General 
Gage,  therefore,  became  keenly  alive  to  the  necessity  of 
resorting  to  some  expedient  to  reduce  the  enormous  cost 
of  transporting  provisions  and  other  necessities  from  the 
seacoast  to  such  distant  parts  as  Fort  de  Chartres.  With 
reference  to  the  Illinois  country  in  particular,  he  reported 
to  the  home  government 3*  that  he  was  ' '  a  good  deal  dis- 
appointed that  any  Demand  should  be  made  for  Provisions, 
as  the  country  used  to  abound  with  it,  and  none  can  be 
supplied  from  our  Provisions ,  but  with  great  difficulty ,  and 
at  enormous  Expense."  "This  want,"  he  continued, 
' '  must  arise  from  the  Inhabitants  abandoning  their  Farms 
to  go  over  to  the  new  French  Settlements,  and  the  only 
method  which  appears  to  me  the  most  proper  to  obviate 

ject  there,  and  as  the  French  are  now  said  to  be  retiring  fast,  you  will 
have  the  better  opportunity  of  making  a  good  Choice  on  which  the 
value  will  chiefly  depend."  Johnson  to  Croghan,  March  28,  1766, 
Johnson  MSS. ,  vol.  XII,  no.  121. 

34  Gage  to  Conway,  March  28,  1766,  B.  T.  Papers  (Hist.  Soc.  Pa.), 
vol.  XX. 


H4  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

Difficulties  on  account  of  Food,  as  well  as  to  strengthen 
those  parts  at  the  least  Expense,  is  to  grant  the  Lands  de- 
serted by  the  French,  which  I  presume  forfeited,  as  well  as 
other  Lands  unsettled ,  using  necessary  Precautions  to  avoid 
Disputes  with  the  Indians,  to  the  British  Settlers.  All  En- 
deavours must  be  used  to  procure  a  Supply  of  Provisions 
upon  the  Spot,  and  I  have  directed  the  Officer  command- 
ing to  get  seed,  and  try  to  make  his  men  cultivate  the 
Ground  near  the  Fort."  Gage  next  proposed,  as  we  have 
already  noted  in  another  connection,35  that  a  military  gov- 
ernor be  appointed  immediately  for  the  Illinois  country ,  on 
account  of  the  distance  of  the  villages  from  any  of  the  Eng- 
lish provinces  and  because  of  their  proximity  to  the  French 
settlements  on  the  Spanish  side  of  the  river,  which  would 
make  any  other  form  of  government  impracticable.  Am- 
plifying his  idea  further  he  declared  that  "  Lands  should  be 
granted  without  Delay,  by  any  Person  authorized  properly 
to  do  it ;  but  no  fees  to  be  taken  by  the  person  who  grants, 
or  by  Secretarys,  Clerks,  Surveyors,  or  other  Persons  what- 
ever :  That  no  large  Tracts  should  be  given ,  but  the  Lands 
granted  in  Farms,  consisting  of  an  Hundred  and  Fifty  or 
Two  Hundred  Acres  of  good  Land,  unless  perhaps  to  Half 
Pay  Officers,  who  might  have  Four  or  Five  Hundred  Acres. 
People  may  be  tempted  on  these  Advantages  to  transport 
themselves  with  a  Year's  Provisions,  Seed  Corn  and  Tools 
for  Husbandry,  down  the  Ohio.  The  Lands  shall  be  held 
of  the  King  on  condition  of  Military  Service,  and  such 
other  Obligations  as  shall  be  convenient." 

It  has  seemed  necessary  to  go  into  Gage's  plan  in  some 
detail  because  in  the  first  place  it  represents  an  attitude 
toward  western  colonization  quite  contrary  to  the  position 
he  assumed  a  few  years  later,  when  he  strongly  opposed 

35  See  above,  ch.  II,  pp.  18-19. 


SCHEMES  FOR  COL  ONIZA  TION  1 1 5 

such  movements.86  In  addition  these  details  give  us  some 
perception  of  the  purposes  which  Gage  had  in  mind  in  the 
establishment  of  a  colony,  the  saving  of  the  heavy  expense 
incurred  in  transporting  provisions  into  the  interior,  and  to 
protect  the  empire,  by  a  buffer  colony,  from  possible  in- 
cursions of  French  and  Spanish. 

Although  not  connected  with  any  other  projects  of  the 
time  this  proposal  of  General  Gage  undoubtedly  gave  some 
encouragement  to  the  promoters  of  a  larger  colony,  who 
now  began  to  develop  the  ideas  of  Croghan  and  Johnson 
into  something  tangible.  About  the  same  time  Governor 
William  Franklin  of  New  Jersey,  together  with  the  Phila- 
delphia firm  of  Baynton ,  Wharton  and  Morgan ,  and  Joseph 
Galloway  and  John  Hughes ,  also  of  the  colony  of  Pennsyl- 
vania, conceived  the  idea  of  forming  a  land  company  for 
the  definite  purpose  of  purchasing  such  lands  at  the  Illinois 
villages  as  the  French  might  desire  to  sell,  as  well  as  to  ob- 
tain a  grant  for  other  lands  in  the  adjoining  country.  Ac- 
cordingly,  in  March,  1766,  they  drew  up  some  articles  of 
agreement  s7  for  the  proposed  company,  which  provided 
among  other  things  that  application  was  to  be  made  to  the 
crown  for  a  grant  of  1,200,000  acres  of  land  in  the  Illinois 
country  or  ''more  if  to  be  procured  ".38  Provision  was  also 
made  for  ten  equal  shareholders,  the  stipulation  to  be 
subject  to  change  in  case  others  desired  to  enter  the  com- 
pany.39 Apparently  Sir  William  Johnson  and  his  deputy, 
Croghan,  were  not  directly  concerned  in  the  formation  of 
this  company,  but  they  were  immediately  invited  to  enter, 

36  See  below. 

37  Articles  of  Agreement,  dated  March  29,  1766,  MS.  in  Hist.  Soc. 
Pa.  Library. 

38  Articles  of  Agreement,  March  29,  1766.  "  Ibid. 


1 1 6  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

and  Croghan,  who  was  then  in  Philadelphia,  signed  the 
contract  on  behalf  of  himself  and  Johnson.40 

The  land  company  thus  organized  was  intended  to  be  the 
foundation  of  a  permanent  colony  in  the  northwest  coun- 
try. '  Governor  Franklin,  in  a  letter  to  his  father,  Dr. 
Franklin,  who  was  at  the  time  in  London  as  agent  for  the 
colony  of  Pennsylvania,  explained  the  proposition  to  him 
as  follows  :  "  A  few  of  us ,  from  his  [Croghan's]  Encourage- 
ment, have  form'd  a  Company  to  Purchase  of  the  French 
Settled  at  the  Illinois,  such  Lands  as  they  have  a  good 
Title  to,  and  are  inclined  to  dispose  of.  But  as  I  thought 
it  would  be  of  little  Avail  to  buy  Lands  in  that  Country, 
unless  a  Colony  were  established  there,  I  have  drawn  up 
some  Proposals  for  that  Purpose,  which  are  much  approved 
of  by  Col.  Croghan  and  the  other  Gentm.  concerned  in 
Philad1.  and  are  sent  by  them  to  Sr.  W.  for  his  Sentiments 
which  when  we  receive,  the  whole  will  be  forwarded  to 

40  Writing  to  Johnson,  March  30,  Croghan  explained:  "  Soon  after 
my  Return  here  [Philadelphia]  from  your  Honour's  I  wrote  you  about 
the  Scheme  of  purchasing  whatever  Grants  the  french  was  possess'd  of 
in  the  Illinois  Country  and  imform'd  your  Honour  that  Governor 
franklin  with  some  other  Gentlemen  hear  had  form'd  the  same  scheme 
and  offered  me  to  be  concerned  with  them  and  your  Honour,  since  w'h 
I  have  agreed  with  them  in  behalf  of  your  Honour  and  myself  .  .  . 
itt  is  likewise  preposed  to  apply  for  a  grant  of  1200,000  acres  to  the 
crown  in  that  Country  and  to  take  into  this  Grant  two  or  three  Gentle- 
men of  Fortune  and  Influence  in  England  and  Governor  franklin  and 
those  other  Gentlemen  Desire  to  know  whome  your  Honour  wold 
chouse  to  be  concerned,  and  that  you  wold  write  to  them  if  you  should 
nott  name  ye  whole  you  would  chouse  they  Designe  to  Save  y  Nomina- 
tion of  such  as  you  dont  to  Dr.  franklin  who  they  prepose  to  send  the 
proposals  to  .  .  .  "  Johnson  MSS.,  vol.  XII,  no.  127.  According 
to  the  Articles  of  Agreement,  as  we  have  them,  there  were  to  be  ten 
equal  shareholders,  but  Croghan  informs  Johnson  that  the  persons  and 
shares  were  as  follows:  Sir  William  Johnson,  2/16,  Governor  Franklin, 
2/16,  John  Baynton,  2/16,  George  Croghan,  2/16,  Samuel  Wharton, 
2/16,  George  Morgan,  2/16,  Joseph  Wharton,  Jr.,  1/16,  Joseph  Whar- 
ton, Sr. ,  1/16,  John  Hughes,  1/16,  and  Joseph  Galloway,  1/16,  ibid. 
It  may  be  suggested  that  possibly  a  different  arrangement  was  made 
after  the  signing  of  the  original  contract. 


SCHEMES  FOR  COLON IZ A TION  1 1 7 

you.  It  is  proposed  that  the  Comp7.  shall  consist  of  12 
now  in  America,  and  if  you  like  the  Proposals,  you  will  be 
at  Liberty  to  add  yourself,  and  such  other  gentlemen  of 
Character  and  Fortune  in  England  as  you  may  think  will  be 
likely  to  promote  the  Undertaking. ' ' 41 

The  proposals  mentioned  in  Governor  Franklin's  letter 
were  outlined  by  him  along  with  the  Articles  of  Agreement ; 
indeed  the  substance  of  the  latter  was  included  in  the  pro- 
posals for  a  colony.42  Franklin  enumerates  a  number  of 
reasons  why  the  establishment  of  a  colony  on  the  Mississippi 
River  and  its  environs  was  desirable.  The  attention  of  the 
ministry  was  called  to  some  of  the  natural  products  of  the 
Illinois  and  the  Mississippi  valley  countries  and  to  the  many 
advantages  of  soil  and  climate  over  other  regions  of  North 
America.  He  declared  that  if  the  lands  on  the  Mississippi 
were  settled  "  we  should  be  enabled  to  supply  all  Europe 
with  those  commodities,  and  at  a  far  cheaper  Rate  than 
they  could  be  afforded  from  any  other  Country."  The 
adaptability  of  the  western  country  to  the  cultivation  of 
tobacco,  hemp,  flax,  indigo,  and  silk  was  positively  affirmed. 
"  Great  Britain  might  also  ",  he  continued,  "  be  furnished 
from  thence  with  Cotton,  Copper,  Iron,  Pot  Ash,  Wine, 
Salt  Petre ,  a  great  variety  of  valuable  Medicinal  Drugs ,  and 

41  April  30,   1766,  Franklin   Papers  (Am.   Phil.   Soc. ),  II,  no.   17. 
He  observes  further  that  "Mr.  Galloway  has  met  with  a  Pamphlet  at 
Mr.  Hill's  on  the  Subject,  which  I  wish  I  had  seen  before  I  had  drawn 
up  the  Proposals,  as  it  might  have  afforded  some  Hints.     However,  as 
I  believe  you  have  not  seen  it,  it  being  printed,  and  I  believe  wrote  in 
Scotland,  I  send  it  enclosed.     You  will  find  your  Name  ment.  in  it, 
page  52."     The  reference  to  the  pamphlet  is  doubtless  to  Expediency 
of  Securing  our  American  Colonies  by  Settling  the  Country  adjoining 
the  River  Mississippi. 

42  "Reasons  for  establishing  a  British  Colony  at  the  Illinois  with 
some  proposals  for  carrying  the  same  into  immediate  Execution  ",  B. 
T.   Papers  (Hist.   Soc.  Pa.),  vols.  XXVII-XXVIII;   Franklin  Papers 
(Am.  Phil.  Soc.),  vol.  LVIII,  no.  4.     See  Documentary  Appendix, 
no.  2. 


n8  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

other  Articles,  which,  with  those  mentioned  before,  make 
the  great  Ballance  of  Trade  against  the  Nation,  and  drain 
it  of  its  Treasure." 

Speaking  more  specifically  of  the  district  of  Illinois,  he 
asserted  confidently  that  Great  Britain  would  "  carry  on  a 
more  extensive  and  advantageous  Fur- Trade,  with  the 
numerous  Indian  Nations  which  reside  near  the  Lakes  and 
the  different  Branches  of  the  Mississippi,  than  was  ever 
known  since  the  first  settlement  of  America — Supplying 
them  with  British  Manufactures  to  a  vast  Amount."  It  is 
pointed  out  that  the  French  could  not  rival  the  English  in 
that  branch  of  commerce  because  the  latter  could  transport 
goods  through  Pennsylvania  and  Virginia  to  the  West  much 
more  cheaply  than  could  be  done  from  New  Orleans  up  the 
Mississippi.  "  For  want  of  this  Opening  thro'  the  middle 
Provinces  of  North  America  to  the  Mississippi,  the  French 
never  had  it  in  their  Power  to  reap  so  much  advantage  from 
that  Country  as  the  English  now  may." 

Governor  Franklin  then  raised  the  question  of  the  most 
efficacious  method  of  supporting  the  posts  which  had  so 
recently  been  taken  from  the  French.  The  solution  offered 
was  the  establishment  of  a  colony  with  a  civil  government. 
This,  it  will  be  noticed,  differed  from  the  plan  of  Gage,  in 
that  he  believed  a  military  government  best  suited  to  the 
circumstances.  "  If  We  have  not  a  Colony  on  the  Spot  to 
support  the  Posts  We  are  now  possessed  of  in  that  Country, 
the  French  who  have  a  Fort  and  an  increasing  Settlement 
on  the  opposite  Shore  of  the  Mississippi,  will  have  it  in 
their  Power,  by  means  of  their  influence  with  the  Indians, 
to  intercept  our  Supplies,  interrupt  our  Trade ,  and  ultimately 
cutt  off  all  Communication  between  the  Illinois  and  the 
present  English  Colonies."  The  suggestion  was  made  that 
a  well-established  colony  would  not  only  prevent  the  French 


SCHEMES  FCR  COL  ONIZA  TION  1 1 9 

and  Indians  from  interfering,  but  the  English  would  be  en- 
abled to  dispossess  the  French  of  the  remainder  of  Louisiana, 
"should  a  future  War  make  it  expedient  ". 

The  more  important  proposals  submitted  for  the  conside- 
ration of  the  ministry  were:43  (i)  To  purchase  from  the 
Indians  all  their  rights  to  the  territory  in  the  Illinois  coun- 
try, not  already  occupied  by  the  French.  (2)  To  establish 
a  civil  government. 44  (3)  To  lay  out  the  proposed  land 
grant  in  townships.45  (4)  To  give  grants  to  provincial  officers 

43  To  each  proposal  was  appended  a  paragraph  of  remarks,  which 
may  have  been  added  by  Sir  William  Johnson,  to  whom  the  proposals 
had  been  sent  for  such  amendments  or  alterations  as  he  thought  neces- 
sary. Croghan  to  Johnson,  March  30,  1766,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol.  XII, 
no.  127;  Governor  Franklin  to  his  father,  April  30,  1766,  Franklin 
Papers  (Am.  Phil.  Soc. ),  II,  17. 

44 The  promoters  of  the  colony  evidently  thought  that  the  govern- 
ment intended  to  establish  a  civil  government  in  the  West.  In  the 
Articles  of  Agreement  of  the  land  company,  we  find  the  statement  that, 
"it  is  expected  that  a  Civil  Government  will  be  established  by  his 
Majesty  in  the  Illinois  country  at  or  near  Fort  Chartres. "  Croghan 
about  the  same  time  wrote:  "  By  Leters  from  England  there  is  the 
greatest  reason  to  believe  that  a  government  will  soon  take  place  there, 
if  so  a  thing  of  this  Kind  must  be  very  valuable  provided  we  succeed." 
Croghan  to  Johnson,  March  30,  1766,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol.  XII,  no. 
127.  John  Baynton,  one  of  the  original  subscribers,  and  a  prominent 
merchant  of  Philadelphia,  wrote  to  James  Rumsey  that  a  civil  govern- 
ment was  soon  to  be  formed  in  the  Illinois  country,  March  I,  1766, 
Ohio  Company  Papers  (Hist.  Soc.  Pa.),  I,  52.  Note  also  the  refer- 
ence in  note  6,  above.  The  following  extract  is  of  interest  in  this  con- 
nection:  "In  case  of  laying  aside  the  superintendents  [of  Indian 
affairs],  a  provision  is  thought  of  for  Sir  William  Johnson.  He  will 
be  made  governor  of  the  new  colony."  B.  Franklin  to  his  son,  August 
28,  1767,  Works,  ed.  Bigelow,  IV,  141. 

45  Evidently  the  authors  of  the  proposals  made  use  of  the  suggestions 
in  Smith's  Historical  Account  of  the  Expedition  against  the  Ohio  In- 
dians. "  Let  all  the  Lands  which  may  be  granted  within  the  first 
twenty  years  be  laid  out  in  Townships,  after  the  manner  practised  in 
some  of  the  New  England  Colonies,  or  according  to  the  Plan  laid  down 
in  the  Historical  Account,  of  the  Expedition  under  Colonel  Bouquet, 
lately  published  (quod  vide)."  In  this  work  the  township  system  as  we 
know  it  to-day  was  outlined.  The  work  is  most  available  now  in  the 
Ohio  Valley  Historical  Series,  see  below  in  Bibliography.  Sir  William 
Johnson  was  doubtless  familiar  with  the  work,  for  in  January,  1766, 


120  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

and  soldiers  who  served  in  the  French  war.  (5)  To  concede 
mines  and  minerals  to  the  owners  of  the  land  in  which  they 
may  be  found,  except  royal  mines,  from  which  the  crown 
might  reserve  one  fifth.46  (6)  To  reserve  five  hundred  acres 
in  every  township  for  the  maintenance  of  a  clergyman  of  the 
Established  Church  of  England.47  (7)  To  bound  the  colony 
as  follows  :  "  From  the  mouth  of  the  Ouisconsin  (or  Wis- 
consing)  River  down  the  Mississippi  agreeable  to  Treaty, 
to  the  Fork  or  Mouth  of  the  Ohio.  Then  up  the  same 
River  Ohio  to  the  River  Wabash,  thence  up  the  same  River 
Wabash  to  the  Portage  at  the  head  thereof,  Then  by  the 
said  Portage  to  the  River  Miamis  and  down  the  said  River 
Miamis  to  Lake  Erie.  Thence  along  the  several  Courses 
of  the  said  Lake  to  Riviere  al  Ours  (or  Bear  River)  and  up 
the  said  River  thereof,  and  from  thence  in  a  Straight  Line, 
or  by  the  Portage  of  St.  Joseph's  River  and  down  the  same 
River  to  Lake  Michigan,  then  along  the  several  Courses  of 
said  Lake  on  the  South  and  West  Side  thereof  to  the  point 
of  Bay  Puans,  and  along  the  several  courses  on  the  East 
Side  of  the  said  Bay  to  the  Mouth  of  Foxes  River,  thence 
up  to  the  Head  thereof  and  from  thence  by  a  Portage  to  the 
Head  of  Ouisconsin  River,  and  down  the  same  to  the 

Dr.  William  Smith,  of  Philadelphia,  sent  him  a  copy.  .See  article  by 
Charles  Whittlesey,  in  Journal  of  the  Association  of  Engineering 
Societies,  vol.  Ill,  no.  n,  p.  278. 

46  Lead-mining  was  an  important  industry  in  the  Illinois  country  in 
the  eighteenth  century,  but  at  this  time  it  was  largely  in  the  hands  of 
the  French   and  Spanish  west  of  the  Mississippi  River,  see  Thwaites, 
"Early   Lead-mining  in  Illinois  and  Wisconsin,"  in  Annual  Report, 
Amer.Hist.  Assoc.,  1893,  pp.  191-196. 

47  This  clause  throws  an  interesting  side-light.     In  the  "  Remark," 
presumably  by  Johnson  (see   above,  note  43),  appended  to  the  clause 
he  says  the  church  "  ought  to  be  well  supported  there,  otherwise  Pres- 
byterianism  will  become  the  Established  Religion  in  that  Country.     It 
is  interesting  to  note  that  the  Bayntons,  the  Whartons,  Morgan,  and 
the  other  participants  in  this  movement  were  Quakers. 


SCHEMES  FOR  COL  ONIZA  TION  1 2 1 

Place  of  Beginning. "  **  In  order  to  settle  immediately  the 
colony  in  the  Illinois  country ,  "  a  Company  of  Gentlemen 
of  Character  and  Fortune  are  ready  and  willing  to  engage, 
That  if  the  Crown  will  make  them  a  Grant,  ...  of  Land49 
free  of  Quit  Rent  .  .  .  to  be  located  at  one  or  more  places 
as  they  shall  chuse,  within  the  Bounds  above  mentioned, 
they  will  at  their  own  .  .  .  Expence ,  Settle  thereon  at  least 
One  white  Protestant  Person  for  every  Hundred  Acres  . . ."  50 
As  already  stated  in  Franklin's  letter  to  his  father,  these 
proposals  were  sent  to  Sir  William  Johnson  for  his  altera- 
tion and  recommendation.61  Johnson  in  turn  inclosed  the 

i8  Benjamin  Franklin  estimated  that  there  "  will  be  in  the  proposed 
country,  by  my  reckoning,  near  sixty-three  millions  of  acres  .  .  .  ", 
Works,  ed.  Bigelow,  IV,  138. 

49  It  is  impossible  to  tell  from  this  document  just  how  many  acres 
were  petitioned  for,  but  according  to  the  Articles  of  Agreement,  as 
already  noticed,  the  company  expected  to  obtain  1,200,000  acres. 

50  "  The  crown  need  not  be  put  to  much  Expence  to  procure  the 
Settlement  of  this  advantageous  Colony.     The  principal  Charges  will 
be  a  Salary  to  the  Governor,  and  some  other  Officers  of  Government 
for  a  few  Years,  when  the  Colonists  will  be  enabled  to  support  their 
own  Civil  Establishment."     It  is  further  suggested  in  the  "  Proposals  " 
that  two  or  three  companies  of  light  infantry  and  light  horse  be  raised 
and  disciplined  for  service  in  the  West,  which  would  be  a  good  security 
for  the  infant  colony  as  well  as  a  protection  for  the  frontiers  of  the  old 
settled   colonies.     The  idea  of    purchasing  the  rights  of  the  French 
seems  to  have  been  abandoned,  for  no  suggestion  of  it  appears  in  the 
"  Proposals  ". 

51  He  also  received  copies  from  several  members  of  the  company, 
Croghan   to  Johnson,  March  30,  1766,  Johnson  MSS. ,  vol.  XII,  no. 
127;  Baynton,  Wharton  and  Morgan  to  Johnson,  June  6,  1766,  ibid. , 
no.  197;  Johnson  to  Governor  Franklin,  June  20,    1766,  see  Lincoln, 
Calendar  of  MSS.  of  Sir  William  Johnson  in  Am.  Anliq.  Soc.  Li- 
brary, 45.      "  Mr.  Croghan    will  transmit  to  your  Honour,  some  pro- 
posals which  we  shall  be  greatly  obliged  to  you  both  to  consider,  and 
alter,  in   such   manner,  as  you  shall  judge  will  be  best."     Baynton, 
Wharton  and  Morgan   to  Johnson,  March  30,  1766,  Johnson  MSS., 
vol.  XII,  no.  128.     Johnson  took  exception  to  that  part  of  the  plan 
which  called  for  the  establishment  of  a  civil  government  in  the  new  col- 
ony.    He    asserted    that   "  we  have  nothing  to  fear  from  a  Military 
Establishment  from  which  a  young  Colony  will  derive  many  advantages 
..."     He  did  not,  however,  make  any  alteration,  Johnson  to  Bayn- 


122  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

papers  to  Benjamin  Franklin  in  London,  together  with  a 
letter  to  Secretary  Henry  Conway  in  which  he  strongly 
recommended  the  adoption  of  the  plan. 52  Dr.  Franklin 
received  the  papers  in  September, 53  but  news  of  the  pro- 
ject was  already  abroad  in  England.  Johnson  had  "  hinted 
the  Affair  "  some  time  before  in  a  letter  to  the  Board  of 
Trade M  and  Benjamin  Franklin  had  himself  received  a 
number  of  communications  from  his  son  and  from  his  Penn- 


ton,  Wharton  and  Morgan,  June  20,  1766,  ibid.,  vol.  XII,  no.  214. 
It  is  of  interest  to  note  that  previous  to  this  time  no  correspondence 
had  ever  passed  between  Sir  V\  illiam  Johnson  and  Governor  Franklin. 
Croghan  to  Johnson,  March  30,  1766,  ibid.,  vol.  XII,  no.  127;  John- 
son to  B.  Franklin,  July  8,  1766,  Lincoln,  Calendar  of  the  MSS,  of 
Sir  William  Johnson,  45. 

52  Johnson  to  Baynton,  Wharton  and  Morgan,  June  20,  1766,  John- 
son MSS.,  vol.  XII,  no.  214;  Johnson  to  Governor  Franklin,  June  20, 
1766,  MS.  letter  in  Am.  Antiq.  Soc.  Library;    same  to  same,  July  8, 
1766,  ibid.;  Johnson  to  B.  Franklin,  July  10,  1/66,  ibid.     In  a  letter 
to  Conway,  dated  July   10,    1766,   Johnson  wrote:   "As  the  scheme 
appears  to  me  to  be  so  reasonable  and  so  well  calculated  for  the  mutual 
Interests  of  Great  Britain  and  its  colonies  I  could  not  refuse  their  re- 
quest ...  I  shall  be  happy,  Sir,  if  my  thoughts  on  the  subject  may  co- 
incide with  Yours  and  I  flatter  myself  with  Your  pardon  for  the  liberty 
I  now  take  as  it  is  intended  for  a  public  benefit  and  proposed  by  men 
of  whose  motives  I  can  have  no  doubt.'1''     Johnson  MSS.,  vol.  XIII,  no. 
I,  and  B.  T.  Papers,  (Hist-  Soc.  Pa. ),  vol.  XXVII.    Observe  that  John- 
son makes  no  mention,  in  his  letter  to  Conway,  of  his  own  or  Governor 
Franklin's  interest  in  the  land  company.     It  was  understood,  however, 
that  no  mention  was  to  be  made  of  that  fact:   "  itt  is  preposed  that  its 
not  to  apear  till  ye  success  of  our  plan  is  known  that  Your  Honour  and 
Governor  franklin  is  concerned  as  its  thought  that  you  can  be  of  more 
Service  by  nott  being  thought  Concern'd  .    .    .  ",  Croghan  to  Johnson, 
March  20,    1766,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol.  XII,  no.  127.     Johnson  had, 
indeed,  hesitated  about  taking  an  active  hand  in  the  affair.     He  wrote 
that  he  was  "  somewhat  of  Opinion  it  would  answer  better  that  I  rec- 
ommended it  in  Gen'l  Terms,  as  an  Affiiir  I  had  heard  was  in  agitation 

.    .    .  ",  Johnson  to  Governor  Franklin,  June  20,  1766,  see  Lincoln, 
Calendar  of  the  MSS.  of  Sir  William  Johnson,  45. 

53  Franklin  to  his  son,  September  12,   1766,    Works,  ed.   Bigelow, 
IV,    137;    Franklin   to   Johnson,   September    12,   1766,    Works,  ed. 
Smythe,  IV,  461. 

64  Johnson  to  Governor  Franklin,  June  20,  1766,  MS.  letter  in  Am. 
Antiq.  Soc.  Library. 


SCHEMES  FOR  COLONIZATION  123 

sylvania  friends.55  The  proposition  was  one  which  Frank- 
lin had  kept  in  mind  ever  since  the  meeting  of  the  Albany 
Congress  in  1754,  when  he  advanced  the  idea  of  western 
settlements,  and  it  was  therefore  with  little  or  no  hesitation 
that  he  now  promised  to  forward  the  scheme  with  all  his 
power.56 

In  the  meantime  the  Rockingham  ministry,  which  had 
been  in  power  since  July,  1765,  had  resigned ;  the  Earl  of 
Chatham  had  been  made  prime  minister  in  August,  1766, 
and  Lord  Shelburne  had  displaced  Conway  as  secretary  of 
state  for  the  southern  department. 57  Johnson's  letter  to 
Conway  and  the  proposals  for  a  colony  went,  therefore,  into 
Shelburne 's  hands.68  In  addition  to  the  plan  itself  with 
Johnson's  recommendations,  Dr.  Franklin  gave  Shelburne 
copies  of  Croghan's  letters  from  the  West  together  with  his 
journal,  and  several  of  Johnson's  letters  on  the  subject. 59 

55  Governor  Franklin  to  his  father,  April  30,  1766,  Franklin  Papers 
(Am.  Phil.  Soc. ),  II,  17.  "Upon  the  first  thoughts  of  the  Scheme, 
Mr.  Galloway  and  I  wrote  to  Dr.  Franklin,  so  that  he  might  essay  it, 
with  the  ministry  .  .  .  ".  Baynton,  Wharton  and  Morgan  to  John- 
son, July  12,  1766,  Johnson  MSS. ,  vol.  XIII,  no.  2. 

68 Franklin  to  his  son,  May  10  and  August  25,  1766,  Works,  ed. 
Bigelow,  IV,  136-137;  Baynton,  Wharton  and  Morgan  to  Johnson, 
July  12,  1766,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol.  XIII,  no.  2;  Baynton,  Wharton 
and  Morgan  to  Johnson,  August  28,  1766,  quoting  from  a  letter  of 
Franklin's,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol.  XIII,  no.  65;  B.  Franklin  to  Johnson, 
September  12,  1766,  Works,  ed.  Smylhe,  IV,  461. 

"Hunt  and  Poole,  ed.,  Pol.  Hist,  of  Eng.,  X,  471-472. 

58 Franklin  to  his  son,  September  12,  1766,  Works,  ed.  Bigelow, 
IV,  137.  Franklin  felt  that  this  change  augured  well  for  the  success 
of  the  project,  for  he  said,  "  it  will  of  course  go  to  Lord  Shelburne, 
whose  good  opinion  of  it  I  have  reason  to  hope  for;  and  I  think  Mr. 
Conway  was  rather  against  distant  posts  and  settlements  in  America." 
Ibid.  In  another  letter  of  the  same  date  he  wrote:  "He  [Conway] 
is  now  in  another  Department,  but  it  will  of  course  go  to  Lord  Shel- 
burne, who  I  think  is  rather  more  favorably  dispos'd  towards  such 
Undertakings."  Franklin  to  Johnson,  Works,  ed.  Smythe,  IV,  461- 
462. 

59  Franklin  to  his  son,  September  27,  1766,  Works,  ed  Bigelow,  IV, 
139- 


124  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

He  offered  as  an  additional  exhibit,  one  of  Evans's  maps  of 
the  middle  colonies  on  which  he  had  marked  in  red  ink  the 
whole  country  included  in  the  boundaries  of  the  proposed 
colony.60 

Shelburne  was  pleased  with  the  plan  submitted,61  but 
openly  confessed  to  Franklin  that  there  were  members  of 
the  government  with  whom  the  scheme  did  not  find  ap- 
proval.62 He  intimated  in  addition  that  the  expense  which 
all  such  affairs  promised  would  work  against  it  in  the  Board 
of  Trade,63  and  consequently  did  not  at  once  promise  his 
active  support  of  the  undertaking.64  As  it  was  therefore 
useless  to  proceed  with  the  plan  without  the  aid  of  Shel- 
burne and  other  members  of  the  cabinet,  Franklin 
spent  the  remaining  months  of  1766,  and  a  large  part 
of  1767  in  an  attempt  to  obtain  their  official  approval. 
In  this  he  joined  efforts  with  General  Phineas  Lyman  of 
the  colony  of  Connecticut,  a  veteran  officer  of  the  French 
and  Indian  war,  who  was  at  this  time  in  London  soliciting 
a  grant  of  land  on  the  Mississippi  for  himself  and  his  sol- 
diers.65 Since  the  boundaries  of  the  two  proposed  grants 

60  Franklin,  to  his  son,  September  27,  1766,  Works,  ed.  Bigelow, 
IV,  139- 

61 "  I  have  mentioned  the  Illinois  affair  to  Lord  Shelburne.  His 
Lordship  had  read  your  plan  for  establishing  a  colony  there,  recom- 
mended by  Sir  William  Johnson,  and  said  it  appeared  to  him  a  reason- 
able scheme."  Franklin  to  his  son,  September  27,  1766,  ibid.,  138. 

62  Ibid. 

63  Franklin   to   his  son,   October  II,   1766,   ibid.,  139.     "He  was 
pleased  to  say  he  really  approved  of  it:  but  intimated  that  every  new 
proposed  expense   for  America  would  meet  with  difficulty  here,  the 
treasury  being  alarmed  and  astonished  at  the  growing  charges  there, 
and  the  heavy  accounts  and  drafts  continually  brought  in  from  thence." 

64  Franklin  to  his  son,  September  27,  1766,  ibid.,  138. 

65 Franklin  to  his  son,  September  12,  1766,  Works,  ed.  Bigelow,  IV, 
137.  "  Plan  proposed  by  General  Phineas  Lyman  for  settling  Louisi- 
ana, and  for  erecting  new  colonies  between  West  Florida  and  the  Falls 
of  St.  Anthony,"  Fifth  Report,  Royal  Hist.  MSS.  Com.,  216,  218. 


SCHEMES  FOR  COLONIZATION  125 

coincided  in  a  large  measure,  both  projects  were  united  at 
the  suggestion  of  Shelburne . 66  The  task  of  creating  a  senti- 
ment among  the  leading  members  of  the  government  suffi- 
ciently strong  to  bring  the  whole  question  to  a  conclusion 
was  slow  and  tedious.  Although  Shelburne  and  some  of 
his  subordinates  were  personally  favorable  to  the  project, 
many  months  elapsed  before  they  were  ready  to  recommend 
the  proposals  to  the  Board  of  Trade  for  its  consideration.67 
One  of  the  most  vital  questions  of  the  day  in  England  was 
that  of  reducing  expenses,  and  Dr.  Franklin  seized  the  op- 
portunity of  urging  upon  Shelburne,  Conway,  Clare,  and 
others  that  a  settlement  in  the  Illinois  country  would  be  one 
of  the  best  modes  of  saving  the  cost  of  maintaining  out- 
posts for  the  protection  both  of  trade  and  of  the  colonies. 

For  further  account  of  Lyman  and  his  career,  see  Hinsdale,  "The 
Establishment  of  the  First  Southern  Boundary  of  the  United  States", 
in  Annual  Report,  Amer.  Hist.  Assoc.,  1893,  and  Sabine,  Loyalists  of 
the  American  Revolution,  II,  33-34. 

66  Franklin  to  his  son,  September  27,  1766,   Works,  ed.  Bigelow  IV, 
139- 

67  The  following  excerpts  indicate  the  progress  of  the  negotiations. 
"  I  have  just  had  a  visit  from  General  Lyman,  and  a  good  deal  of  con- 
versation on  the  Illinois  scheme.     He  tells  me  that  Mr.  Morgan,  who 
is  under-secretary  of  the  Southern  department,  is  much  pleased  with  it; 
and  we  are  to  go  together  to  talk  to  him  concerning  it."     Franklin  to 
his  son,  September  30,    1766,    Works,  ed.  Bigelow,  IV,  139.     "  Mr. 
Jackson  is  now  come  to  town.     The  ministry  have  asked  his  opinion 
and  advice  on  your  plan  of  a  colony  in  the  Illinois,  and  he  has  just 
sent  me  to  peruse  his  answer  in  writing,  in  which  he  warmly  recom- 
mends it,   and  enforces  it  by  strong  reasons."     November  8,   1766, 
ibid.,  140.     "  More  than  one  plan  has  been  given  in  relative  to  form- 
ing a  Government  in  the  Illinois  Country,  but  till  a  general  system  for 
America  shall  be  further  advanced,  no  resolution  can  be  taken  on  this 
Head."     Shelburne  to  Gage,  December  n,  1766,  P.  R.  O. ,  Am.  and 
W.  I.,  vol.  122.     "Great  changes  being  expected  keeps  mens'  minds 
in  suspense,  and  obstructs  public  affairs  of  every  kind.     It  is  therefore 
not  to  be  wondered  at  that  so  little  progress  is  made  in  our  American 
scheme  of  the  Illinois  grant."     Franklin  to  his  son,  February  14,  1767, 
Works,  ed  Bigelow,  IV,  140.     "  The  Illinois  affair  goes  forward  but 

slowly;  Lord  Shelburne  told  me  again  last  week  that  he  highly  ap- 
proved of  it,  but  others  were  not  of  his  sentiments,  particularly  the 
Board  of  Trade.  Lyman  is  almost  out  of  patience  and  now  talks  of 
carrying  out  his  settlement  without  leave."  Ibid.,  140. 


126  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

He  reinforced  the  various  arguments  enumerated  in  the 
proposals,  laying  particular  stress  upon  the  strategic  value 
of  such  a  colony  in  the  event  of  war  with  Spain.  A  force 
could  be  raised  there  ' '  which ,  on  occasions  of  a  future  war, 
might  easily  be  poured  down  the  Mississippi  upon  the  lower 
country,  and  into  the  Bay  of  Mexico,  to  be  used  against 
Cuba,  the  French  Islands,  or  Mexico  itself."  68  Finally, 
as  a  result  of  his  solicitations,  Franklin  could  report  on 
August  28,  1767,  that  "  the  secretary  appeared  finally  to 
be  fully  convinced,  and  there  remained  no  obstacle  but 
the  Board  of  Trade ,  which  was  to  be  brought  over  privately 
before  the  matter  should  be  referred  to  them  officially."69 

His  mind  made  up,  Shelburne  became  at  once  an  earnest 
advocate  of  western  colonization,  and  himself  drew  up  a 
statement  of  reasons  for  those  settlements,  which  he  pre- 
sented to  the  King  in  Council.70  He  reinforced  his  own 

68Franklin  to  his  son,  August  28,  1767,  Works,  ed.  Bigelow,  IV, 
141.  *  Ittd. 

70  Ibid.  In  a  letter  to  Gage,  November  14,  1767,  Shelburne  clearly 
indicated  his  position:  "The  enormous  expense  attending  the  present 
method  of  supplying  the  Troops  cantoned  in  the  back  Settlements  and 
frontier  Posts  of  North  America  with  the  heavy  contingent  Charges 
arising  from  the  Transportation  of  Stores,  and  the  danger  to  which  the 
Discipline  of  the  Army  is  exposed  by  the  Regiment's  being  broken  up 
into  small  Detachments;  have  all  been  very  often  and  very  justly  repre- 
sented in  your  letters: — to  remedy  these  evils  no  measure  seems  to  bid 
fairer  than  one,  which,  by  establishing  Governments  where  Provisions 
and  Necessaries  may  be  furnished  on  the  spot,  will  render  half  the 
Posts  kept  up  unnecessary;  while  the  remainder  may  be  partly  trans- 
ferred to  the  care  of  the  several  Provinces  and  partly  maintained  at  a 
much  less  expense.  The  illicit  Trade  with  the  French  and  Spaniards 
will  be  in  a  great  measure  cut  off,  as  the  goods  must  be  intercepted  by 
our  Traders  in  their  passage;  the  Indians  will  be  prevented  from  In- 
cursions into  the  back  Settlements;  precise  and  definite  Boundaries 
will  be  put  to  the  old  Colonies;  the  Trade  and  Manufactures  of  Great 
Britain  will  be  extended  into  the  remotest  Indian  Nations,  and  such 
Posts  only  require  to  be  garrisoned  as  command  the  different  Indian 
communications,  or  the  intercourse  between  his  Majesty's  different 
colonies,  by  the  great  Rivers  and  Lakes."  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I., 
vol.  123. 


SCHEMES  FOR  COL  ONIZA  TION  1 2  7 

sentiments  by  excerpts  from  the  letters  of  Generals  Am- 
herst n  and  Gage 72  and  Richard  Jackson, 73  whom  he  de- 
clared were  the  best  judges  of  everything  relating  to 
America.  The  Council  having  approved  the  plan,74  it  was 
on  October  5th  submitted  to  the  Board  of  Trade.75 

71  Amherst,  Gage's  predecessor  as  commander-in-chief  in  America, 
carried  on  considerable   correspondence  with  the  ministry  concerning 
the  West  both  before  and  after  his  resignation  in  1763.     The  details  of 
his  proposals  do  not  appear,  but  he  recommended  in  general  terms  the 
creation  of  some  sort  of  establishments  in  the  West,  Shelburne  to  Lords 
of  Trade,  October  5,  1767,  B.T.  Papers  (Hist.  Soc.  Pa.),  vol.  XXVII; 
N,  Y.  Col.  Docs.,  VII,  982;  Franklin  to  his  son,  November  25,  1767, 

Works,  ed.  Eigelow,  IV,  144;  Fifth  Report,  Royal  Hist.  MSS. 
Com.,  210,  see  also  217. 

72  Gage  advocated  western  settlements  until  about  1768,  after  which 
date  he  is  found  in  opposition,  Gage  to  Hillsborough,  June   16,  1768, 
P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  124,  and  correspondence  after  that  date. 
Although  favoring  colonies  prior  to  1768,  Gage  was  in  no  way  connected 
with  any  of  the  schemes  promoted  by  the  land  companies.     Statements 
that  he  was  so  interested  have  been  made  by  Bancroft,  Hist,  of  U.  S., 
ed.  1854,  VI,  32,  and  by  W.  C.  Ford,  in.  Writings  of  George  Wash- 
ington, II,  326.     Winsor  also  states  that   "  General  Gage  and  a  body 
of  Philadelphia  merchants    joined   the  others  in  this  new  memorial  ", 
Westward  Movement,  38,  but  Sir  William  Johnson  declared:  "I  have 
sounded  Gen'l  Gage  on  the  occasion,  who  declines  being  concerned." 
Johnson  to  Governor  Franklin,  June  20,  1766,  MS.  letter  in  Am.  Antiq. 
Soc.  Library.     Gage,  indeed,  did  not  favor  the  large  proprietary  colo- 
nies which  were  being  urged  by  the  land  companies.     Believing  that 
the  Board  of  Trade  would  declare  in  favor  of  the  policy  of  western  set- 
tlements, he  wrote:   "I  would  now  beg  leave  to  mention  the  Propriety 
at  the  first  formation  of  these  Settlements,  of  granting  the  lands  upon 
easy  conditions  and  in  small  Lotts  contiguous  to  each  other,  not  to  be 
alienated  by  the  grantees,  or  else  by  various  artifices  they  will  soon  be 
transferred  into  the  hands  of  a  few  people  who  will  become  proprietors 
of  large  Tracts  which  Experience  has  shown  are  seldom  settled,  but  kept 
by  the  owners  in  Expectation  that  the  lands  will  increase  in  value.     The 
Prospect  of  getting  good  farms  on  easy  Terms  will  encourage  many 
Families  to  emigrate  from  all  the  Colonies."     Gage  to  Shelburne,  Jan- 
uary 23,  1768,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  124.     Note  also  Gage's 
propositions,  pp.  114-115,  above. 

73  Jackson  was  appointed  counsel  to  the  Board  of  Trade  in  Apri^  1770, 
Chalmers,  Opinions  of  Eminent  Lawyers,  37. 

74  "  I  returned  last  night  from  Paris,  and  just  now  hear  that  the  Illi- 
nois settlement  is  approved  of  in  the  Cabinet  Council  ",  Franklin  to  his 
son,  October  9,  1767,  Works,  ed.  Bigelow,  IV,  141  . 

75  Shelburne  to  Lords  of  Trade,  October  5,  1767,  B.  T.  Papers  (Hist. 


128  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

The  proposition  to  be  considered  by  the  Board  was  not, 
however,  the  one  originally  submitted  by  Franklin.  Dur- 
ing the  years  from  1763  to  1770,  we  find  representatives  of 
other  companies  and  interests  in  London  seeking  to  ad- 
vance their  cause.  The  Mississippi  Company  was  still 
alive  and  its  agents,  Thomas  Gumming  and  Arthur  Lee, 
were  both  in  London  at  this  time  urging  the  proposition  of 
this  company  upon  the  ministry.76  Colonel  George  Mercer 
was  suing  in  behalf  of  the  old  Ohio  Company  for  the  per- 
fection of  its  former  grant, "and  representatives  of  the 
soldiers  who  were  enlisted  by  Governor  Dinwiddie  in  1754 
under  promises  of  land  were  likewise  claiming  their  rights. 
And  we  have  already  noted  the  presence  in  England  of 
General  Lyman,  with  whom  at  the  suggestion  of  Shelburne, 
Dr.  Franklin  had  made  common  cause.  Moreover,  some 
of  the  proposed  grants  coincided 78  while  others  overlapped 
each  other.79  Although  converted  to  the  policy  of  western 

Soc.  Pa.),  vol.  XXVII;  Franklin  to  his  son,  October  g,  1767,  Works, 
ed.  Bigelow,  IV,  142;  same  to  same,  November  25,  1767,  ibid.,  144: 
Shelburne  to  Gage,  November  14,  1767,  P.  R.  O. ,  Am.  and  W.  I., 
vol.  123.  The  whole  western  problem  was  before  the  cabinet  during 
the  entire  summer  and  autumn  of  1767,  when  the  matter  was  turned 
over  to  the  Board  of  Trade.  Note  in  margin  of  "  Minute  "  submitted 
by  Shelburne  to  the  cabinet  in  1767,  Lansdowne  MSS.,  vol.  L,  p.  185. 

76  Letter  of  the  Company  to  Gumming,  March   I,   1767,  P.  R.  O., 
Chatham  Papers,  vol.  97;    Petition  to  the  Crown,  December  16,  1768, 
printed  in  Butler,  Hist,  of  Ky.,  381-383. 

77  Letter  of  the  Company  to  Gumming,  September  28,  1763,  P.  R.  O., 
Chatham  Papers,  vol.  97.     "  We  are  also  to  observe  to  you,  Sir,  that 
Col.  Mercer  is  now  in  London  soliciting  for  the  Ohio  Company,  and 
perhaps  he  may  have  under  his  protection  the  Interest  of  other  Com- 
panies whose  concerns  may  possibly  interfere  with  ours,  or  that  he  may 
think  so;   and  thereby  be  induced  to  oppose  our  Scheme;   we  request 
you  not  to  converse  with  Col.  Mercer  on  the  subject  of  our  solicitation, 
nor  to  let  him  know  that  any  such  plan  is  projected."     Ibid.     See  also 
Johnson  to  Lords  of  Trade,  July  8,   1763,  P.  R.  O. ,  Colonial  office, 
class  V,  i33o,No.  Y.,  107,  p.  511. 

78  Such  as  the  Franklin  and  Lyman  proposals. 

79  For  example,  the  Franklin  and  Mississippi  Company's  boundaries. 


SCHEMES  FOR  COLONIZATION  129 

colonization  along  broad  general  lines,  Shelburne  was 
doubtless  also  convinced  that  under  these  confusing  cir- 
cumstances, it  would  be  impossible  to  make  any  progress 
toward  securing  a  favorable  report  from  the  Board  of  Trade, 
whose  president  was  already  known  to  be  hostile  to  the 
movement.80  On  October  i,  1767,  therefore,  Shelburne 
presented  a  plan  providing  for  the  establishment  of  three 
distinct  colonies  in  the  Northwest.81  The  center  of  one  of 
the  proposed  governments  was  to  be  "  at  the  Detroit  be- 
tween Lakes  Erie  and  Huron,"  another  "at  or  near  the 
Mouth  of  the  Ohio,"  and  the  third  "  in  the  Illinois  Coun- 
try at  or  near  the  Mouth  of  the  River  of  that  name."  82  In 
each  colony  there  were  to  be  one  hundred  original  proprie- 
tors, each  of  whom  was  to  be  allowed  "  to  take  up  twenty 
thousand  acres  of  land  (without  paying  any  fine  or  consid- 
eration to  the  King  for  them) ,  and  to  sell  to  undertenants ; 
and  the  proprietors  were  also  to  have  possessed  their  lands 

80  Franklin  to  his  son,  September  27,  1766,  Works,  ed.  Bigelow,  IV, 
138. 

81 "  Settlement  on  the  Ohio  River  ",  ibid.,  V,  45;  Considerations  on 
the  Agreement  with  the  Honorable  Thomas  Walpole,  21. 

82 "  Representation  of  the  Lords  of  Trade  on  the  State  of  Indian  Affairs, 
March  7,  1768,"  N.  Y.  Col.  Docs. ,  VIII,  27.  "  During  the  administra- 
tion of  the  Earl  of  Shelburne,  several  applications  were  made  to  his 
lordship,  for  grants  of  land  upon  the  Ohio,  at  the  Illinois  and  Detroit; 
and  .  .  .  his  lordship,  at  that  time  proposed  the  establishment  of  three 
new  colonies  at  these  places."  Considerations  on  the  Agreement  with 
the  Honourable  Thomas  Walpole,  21.  See  also  "Settlement  on  the 
Ohio  River",  in  Franklin's  Works,  ed.  Bigelow,  V,  45-46.  Both 
Gage  and  Amherst  had  recommended  the  erection  of  more  than  one  col- 
ony in  the  West :  "  His  Majesty  likewise  commands  me  to  refer  to  Your 
Lordships  Extracts  from  several  Letters  of  Sir  Jeffry  Amherst  and  Gen- 
eral Gage  recommending  the  Establishment  of  further  new  Governments 
on  the  Mississippi,  the  Ohio,  and  at  Detroit  ".  Shelburne  to  Lords  of 
Trade,  October  5,  1767,  B.  T.  Papers  (Hist.  Soc.  Pa.);  Amherst  to 
Egremont,  November  30,  1762,  recommending  the  establishment  of  a 
seat  of  government  at  Detroit,  Fifth  Report,  Royal  Hist.  MSS.  Com., 
317,  218;  Franklin  to  his  son,  November  25,  1767,  Works,  ed.  Bige* 
low,  IV,  144. 


1 30  I HE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

fifteen  years,  without  paying  any  quit- rent  or  taxes;  .  .  . 
at  the  expiration  of  the  15  years,  they  were  to  have  paid  a 
quit-rent  to  the  King  of  two  shillings  per  hundred  acres ; 
and  this  quit  rent  was  to  have  been  altogether  applied  to 
the  payment  of  the  contingencies  of  the  government."  M 
What  form  of  government  Shelburne  had  in  mind  for  the 
new  colonies  does  not  appear.  It  is  probable  that  that 
question  was  left  in  abeyance  until  the  decision  of  the 
Board  of  Trade  was  made  known. 

In  his  communication  to  the  Lords  of  Trade,  in  which  he 
presented  the  question  of  new  settlements,  Shelburne  called 
the  Board's  attention  to  certain  other  phases  of  the  western 
problem  just  then  demanding  solution.  It  was  felt  by  the 
government  that  since  the  danger  of  an  Indian  rupture  was 
becoming  minimized,  the  enormous  expense  attending  the 
administration  of  the  western  country  should  be  reduced. 
The  Indian  trade,  which,  since  the  peace,  had  been  man- 
aged by  the  imperial  government  acting  through  the  general 
superintendents,  was  not  fulfilling  the  expectations  of  the 

88  Considerations  on  the  Agreement  with  the  Honourable  Thomas 
Walpole,  22.  It  is  possible  that  Shelburne  intended  the  colony  "  at 
or  near  the  Mouth  of  the  Ohio  "to  be  undertaken  by  the  Mississippi 
Company,  but  there  is  not  enough  evidence  to  prove  it.  It  may  be 
said,  however,  that  the  Mississippi  Company  had  petitioned  for  land, 
part  of  which  lay  south  of  the  Ohio  River,  while  Franklin's  proposed 
grant  was  all  on  the  northward,  so  that  we  might  expect  some  such 
arrangement.  In  the  meantime  the  land  company  organized  by  Gov- 
ernor Franklin  and  Baynton,  Wharton  and  Morgan  had  evidently  in- 
creased its  membership.  Provision  was  made  in  the  Articles  of  Agree- 
ment for  at  least  two  additional  members,  and  it  was  expected  that  Dr. 
Franklin  would  himself  choose  these  two  in  England.  Franklin,  how- 
ever, was  so  pleased  with  the  proposition,  that  he  recommended  a 
further  enlargement  in  membership,  as  will  appear  from  the  following : 
"  It  gives  us  great  pleasure  that  thou  approves  the  Illinois  scheme,  and 
although  it  was  at  that  time  thought  it  might  be  prudent  to  take  in  two 
persons,  such  as  thou  should  approve  of,  yet  I  conceive  it  will  by  no 
means  be  disagreeable  to  our  Company,  should  thou  enlarge  the  num- 
ber, if  a  proportionable  number  of  acres  be  granted."  Thomas  Whar- 
ton to  B.  Franklin,  November  11,  1766,  Sparks  MSS.,  XVI,  81. 


SCHEMES  FOR  COLONIZATION  131 

ministry. w  Its  management  was  furthermore  becoming 
more  and  more  expensive  and  the  necessity  of  supporting 
garrisons  for  the  protection  of  that  commerce  added  greatly 
to  the  already  heavy  burdens  of  the  treasury.  Shelburne 
was  himself  convinced  that  the  management  of  the  Indian 
trade  should  be  transferred  to  the  individual  colonies  and 
that  some  of  the  interior  posts  should  be  reduced  or  else 
supported  by  the  colonies.85  On  these  two  questions  he 
was  in  substantial  agreement  with  his  colleagues.  But  he 
was  persuaded  in  addition  that  the  planting  of  colonies  in 
the  interior  of  America  would  tend  more  than  anything 
else  to  bring  about  a  proper  adjustment  of  all  the  discord- 
ant elements.  Such  settlements  would,  in  his  mind,  form 
barriers  for  the  old  colonies,  become  markets  for  the  sale 
of  British  manufactures,  protect  the  fur  trade  against  French 
and  Spanish  emissaries,  furnish  provisions  for  necessary 
military  posts,  and  give  to  the  French  subjects  of  England 
a  stable  government.86  In  a  very  able  paper  presented  to 
the  Cabinet  in  the  early  summer  of  1 7 67 87  Shelburne  had 
argued  that  such  colonies  would  not  be  expensive  :  that  the 
quit  rents  would  soon  be  sufficient  to  maintain  them  and  to 
create  a  fund  for  other  purposes,  especially  if  the  grants  of 
land  were  placed  under  proper  supervision.  He  believed 
that  a  very  simple  system  could  thus  be  created  for  the 
West  through  the  establishment  of  new  governments  ra  and 
the  maintenance  of  a  few  military  posts,  and  by  leaving  the 
management  of  Indian  affairs  to  the  colonies,  subject  to 

84  See  above,  ch.  V. 

85  Minutes  submitted  to  cabinet,  Lansdowne  MSS.,  vol.  L,  p.  185. 

86  See  quotation  from  letter  of  Shelburne  to  Gage,  November  14, 
1767,  in  note  70,  above. 

87  Lansdowne  MSS.,  vol.  L,  p.  185. 

88  At  this  time  he  proposed  two  colonies,  one  at  Detroit  and  one  in 
Illinois,  ibid. 


I32  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

general  regulation  by  the  Board  of  Trade.  In  answer  to 
those  who  protested  that  the  Indians  would  be  outraged, 
Shelburne  made  the  prophetic  suggestion  that  if  the  Indians 
did  not  like  to  be  surrounded  by  the  new  colonies  they 
could  sell  their  lands  and  move  westward  or  become  civil- 
ized. 

Shelburne  doubtless  had  in  mind  a  certain  element  of 
opposition  to  his  plan  in  the  Board  itself,89  when,  in  his 
letter  of  October  5th,  he  placed  the  heads  of  inquiry  relat- 
ing to  the  expense  of  the  imperial  management  of  the  In- 
dian trade  and  of  the  maintenance  of  western  garrisons  first 
in  the  list,  so  that  they  formed  a  sort  of  introduction  to  his 
proposition  for  the  western  colonies.90 

Soon  after  this  the  Board  called  for  the  opinion  of  the 
merchants,  whether  the  settlement  of  colonies  in  the  Illi- 
nois country  and  at  Detroit  would  promote  in  any  way  the 
commerce  of  Great  Britain.  Dr.  Franklin,  who  was  pres- 
ent at  the  meeting,  says  that  they  answered  unanimously  in 
the  affirmative.91 

Whatever  may  have  been  the  prospect  in  October  or 
November  for  a  favorable  report  on  the  colonial  project, 
the  hopes  of  the  promoters  were  dashed  in  the  following 
months.  In  order  to  understand  the  situation  it  is  neces- 

89  This  opposition  was  apparent  as  early  as  1766,  at  the  first  sugges- 
tion of  the  project.     Dr.  P'ranklin  was  of  the  opinion  that  Lord  Hills- 
borough  was  at  the  bottom  of  the  opposition  at  that  time,  Franklin  to 
his  son,  September  27,  1766,  Works,  ed.  Bigelow,  IV,  138. 

90  "  The  parts  of  the  Service  which  we  are  more  immediately  called 
upon  by  the  Earl  of  Shelburne's  letter  to  give  Our  attention,  are  First, 
The  present  Civil  Establishment  regarding  the  Indians;  Secondly,  the 
disposition  of  the  Troops  for  Indian  Purposes;  and  lastly,  the  Establish- 
ment of   certain  new  Colonies."     "Representation   of   the   Lords  of 
Trade  on  the  State  of  Indian  Affairs,  March    7,    1768,"  N.   Y.   Col. 
Docs.,  VIII,  20. 

91  Franklin  to  his  son,  November  13,  1767,  Works,  ed.  Bigelow,  IV, 
142. 


133 

sary  to  note  the  political  situation  in  England  at  the  period 
under  discussion.    The  Chatham  ministry,  formed  in  August, 

1766,  contained  several  men  who  favored  the  cause  of  the 
colonies.     Chatham  himself,  Conway,  one  of  the  secretaries 
of  state  and  mover  of  the  repeal  of  the  Stamp  Act,  and 
Lord  Shelburne,  secretary  of  state  for  the  southern  depart- 
ment, were  all  in  favor  of  adopting  a  more  liberal  policy 
toward  the  colonies.     But  with  the  retirement  of  Chatham 
on  account  of  illness  a  group  of  men  stepped  into  power 
who  believed  that  the  colonies  should  bear  part  of  the 
burden  of  imperial  defence.     Prominent  among  these  men 
was  Charles  Townshend,  author  of  the   Revenue  Act  of 

1767.  At  that  time  the  management  of  American  affairs 
was  centered  in  the  hands  of  two  men,  the  secretary  of 
state  for  the  southern  department  and  the  president  of  the 
Board  of  Trade.     The  president  of  the  Board  in  1766  was 
Lord  Hillsborough,  a  thoroughgoing  advocate  of  restriction. 
The  Board  at  this  time,  however,  had  but  little  power,  it 
having  become  a  mere  "  Board  of  Report  upon  reference 
to  it  for  advice  or  information  on  the  part  of  the  Secretary 
of  State".92 

Throughout  1767  Shelbourne  was  under  the  necessity  of 
carrying  out  the  will  of  the  ministry  and  of  Parliament,  dis- 
tasteful though  it  was.  Friction  between  himself  and  the 
cabinet  became  so  pronounced  that  for  months  he  failed  to 
attend  the  meetings.93  In  September,  Townshend,  the 
most  influential  minister  in  the  cabinet,  died  and  there  was 
an  opportunity  for  Grafton  to  reconstruct  the  policy  of  the 
government  along  the  lines  advocated  by  Chatham  and 
Shelburne.  But  he  chose  to  continue  the  policy  of  Town- 

92  Fitzmaurice,  Life  of  Shelburne,  II,  2.     Hillsborough  accepted  the 
office  on  that  condition.      Gren-ville  Papers,  III,  73,  254. 
98  Ibia,,  58. 


I34  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

shend  and  admitted  into  the  ministry  members  of  the  Bed- 
ford party,  who  were  advocates  of  the  adoption  of  a  firm 
policy  toward  the  colonies.  The  retirement  of  Shelburne 
as  colonial  minister  was  made  a  condition  of  the  support  of 
Bedford.94  The  King  was  likewise  using  his  influence 
against  the  retention  of  the  liberal  minister.95  Shelburne 
was  finally  relieved  of  his  unhappy  situation ;  for  in  Jan- 
uary, 1768,  the  office  of  secretary  of  state  for  the  colonies 
was  created,  and  Lord  Hillsborough  was  appointed  to  fill 
the  office.96  The  Board  of  Trade,  now  deprived  of  all  its 
executive  powers,  was  under  the  nominal  direction  of  Lord 
Clare,  Hillsborough  having  resigned  the  presidency  in 
December,  i766.97 

Hillsborough 's  opposition  to  western  colonies  has  already 
been  noted.  To  men  like  Franklin,  therefore,  the  adverse 
report  made  in  March,  1768,  must  have  been  no  surprise. 
The  Board  of  Trade,  under  the  inspiration  of  Hillsborough, 
indorsed  the  recommendations  of  the  former  colonial  min- 
ister that  the  management  of  the  Indian  trade  should  be 
transferred  to  the  colonies  and  that  certain  interior  posts 
might  then  be  reduced,98  but  declared  a  disbelief  in  the 
western  colonial  plan  as  a  further  means  of  reducing  im- 
perial expenses.99  The  elaborate  argument  against  this  last 
proposition  may  be  logically  divided  into  two  parts.  In 

94  Grenvitte  Papers,  III,  67.  95  Ibid,,  77. 

**Ibid.,  77;  Hunt  and  Poole,  ed.,  Pol.  Hist,  of  Eng.,  X,  472. 

97  Rockingham  Memoirs,  I,  78.     Later  in    1768  he   again  became 
president  of  the  Board,  thus  holding  two  offices. 

98  "  Representation  of  the  Lords  of  Trade  on  the  State  of  Indian 
Affairs,  March  7,  1768",  N.  Y.  Col.  Docs.,  Mill,  19-28;  Hillsborough 
to  Gage,  April  15,  1768,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  124,  Winsor, 
Westward  Movement,  41,  places  the  date  at  1767,  which  is  incorrect. 
On  p.  40  of  the  same  work  he  also  states  that  Shelburne  laid  Frank- 
lin's scheme  before  the  Board  in  October,  1766,  which  should  be  1767. 

99  "  Representation  of  the  Lords  of  Trade  on  the  State  of  Indian 
Affairs,  March  7,  1768  ",  N.  Y.  Col.  Does.,  VIII,  28-31. 


SCHEMES  FOR  COL  ONIZA  TION  j  3  5 

the  first  place  the  proposal  for  the  establishment  of  colonies 
in  the  interior  as  a  general  principle  of  policy  is  subjected 
to  a  severe  criticism.  The  policy  of  Great  Britain  had 
always  been  to  confine  settlements  to  the  seacoast  in  order 
better  to  promote  the  commerce,  navigation,  and  manu- 
factures of  the  kingdom.100  This  principle  was  illustrated 
by  the  encouragement  given  the  colonizing  of  Nova  Scotia, 
and  the  formation  of  the  colonies  of  Georgia,  East  Florida, 
and  West  Florida,  and  by  the  provision  in  the  procla- 
mation of  1763  whereby  the  interior  country  was  left  to  the 
Indians.  The  Board  declared  that  this  policy  had  been 
productive  of  vast  commercial  and  industrial  benefits  to  the 
mother  country. 

In  the  second  place,  they  proceeded  to  answer  the  spe- 
cific arguments  advanced  by  the  advocates  of  the  new 
propositions  :  (i)  Settlements  in  the  interior,  inaccessible 
to  shipping,  would  be  led  to  manufacture  for  themselves, 
instead  of  becoming  a  market  for  English  products.  (2) 
The  extension  of  the  fur  trade  depended  upon  the  Indians 
remaining  in  possession  of  their  hunting  grounds.  (3)  In- 
stead of  affording  protection  to  the  old  colonies,  they 
would  demand  protection  for  themselves.  (4)  New  colo- 
nies would  undeniably  be  of  advantage  in  furnishing  a 
supply  of  provisions  for  the  forts  and  garrisons  in  the  in- 
terior country,  but  since  many  of  these  might  be  reduced, 
the  advantage  would  be  of  doubtful  value.  (5  )  They  would 
furnish  the  French  inhabitants  of  the  West  with  civil  gov- 
ernment, but  that  would  likewise  be  of  doubtful  utility, 
since  these  colonies  have  always  been  subject  to  a  military 
government,  and  therefore  needed  no  other. 

Hillsborough  was  a  bitter  opponent  of  colonial  expansion 

100  See  also  Hillsborough  to  Gage,  July  31,  1770,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and 
W.  I.,  vol.  126. 


136  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

in  general,  and  the  objections  summarized  in  this  report 
represent  in  a  large  measure  his  own  opinions  as  well  as  the 
point  of  view  held  by  a  large  body  of  conservative  English- 
men of  that  time,  who  had  not  yet  reached  the  broader 
notions  held  by  Shelburne,  Franklin,  and  Adam  Smith  as 
to  the  end  for  which  colonies  ought  to  be  created.  The 
view  of  the  class  represented  by  Hillsborough  and  Lord 
Barrington  was  well  defined  by  a  pamphleteer  of  the  time, 
who  declared  that  ' '  a  colony  is  profitable  according  as  its 
land  is  so  good,  that  by  a  part  of  the  labor  of  the  inhabi- 
tants bestowed  on  its  cultivation,  it  yields  the  necessaries  of 
life  sufficient  for  their  sustenance ;  and  by  the  rest  of  their 
labor  produces  staple  commodities  in  such  quantity,  and  of 
such  value,  as  brings  for  the  mother  country,  in  the  way  of 
commerce  and  traffic,  all  manufactures  necessary  for  the 
proper  accommodation  of  the  colonists,  and  for  the  gradual 
improvement  of  the  colony,  as  the  number  of  people  in- 
crease."101 

There  were  reasons,  however,  other  than  those  mentioned 
by  the  Board  of  Trade,  which  appear  to  have  influenced 
Hillsborough's  attitude,  and  even  that  of  Gage,  who,  in 
1768,  reversed  his  position  on  the  colonial  question.  It 
seems  worth  while,  therefore,  to  examine  whether  the  argu- 
ments in  the  report  of  1768  are  an  entirely  adequate  expla- 
nation of  the  rejection  of  Shelburne 's  policy.  At  the  same 
time  it  must  be  observed  that  although  Hillsborough  was 
opposed  to  the  creation  of  new  provinces  in  the  interior,  he 
did  not  at  this  time  disapprove  of  the  gradual  extension  of 
the  older  settlements  beyond  the  Alleghanies.  As  late  as 

101  Quoted  by  Winsor,  but  without  indication  of  author  or  title,  West- 
ward Movement,  41.  See  also  Lord  Harrington's  Plan  relative  to  the 
Out  Posts,  Indian  Trade,  etc.,  May  10,  1766.  Lansdowne  MSS.,  vol. 
L,  pp.  49h-6i. 


SCHEMES  FOR  COLONIZATION  137 

1768  he  stated  definitely  that  no  objection  could  be  had  to 
such  colonies,102  and  at  the  first  suggestion  of  the  Vandalia 
grant  south  of  the  Ohio,  warmly  supported  it.103 

It  is  necessary  to  bear  in  mind  that  the  imperial  govern- 
ment during  the  decade  under  consideration  was  becoming 
more  and  more  embarrassed  by  the  many  problems  of  im- 
perial administration.  The  great  war  just  closed  had  re- 
sulted in  bringing  upon  the  government  many  new  respon- 
sibilities, not  the  least  of  which  was  the  administration  of 
the  newly -ceded  territories  and  the  defence  of  the  empire. 
It  is  not  surprising,  therefore,  that  the  members  of  the 
ministry  should  hesitate  to  sanction  the  establishment  of 
new  colonial  governments  when  questions  of  administration 
and  finance  were  already  causing  serious  difficulties  between 
the  mother  country  and  the  established  colonies.  The 
factor  of  expense  entered  into  the  consideration  of  every 
new  project  and  the  colonial  schemes  were  no  exception  to 
this  rule ,  especially  since  the  government  was  asked  to  bear 
a  certain  part  of  the  expense. 

The  correspondence  of  Shelburne  and  Franklin  shows  that 
at  the  first  suggestion  of  the  proposed  settlements  this  factor 
was  uppermost  in  the  mind  of  the  former.104  Shelburne 
became  convinced  that  ultimately  this  objection  would  be 

102  "  Representation  of  the  Lords  of  Trade  on  the  State  of  Indian 
Affairs,  March  7,  1768",  N.  Y.  Col.  Docs.,  VIII,  28-31. 

108  Franklin  to  his  son,  July  14,  1773,  Works,  ed.  Bigelow,  V,  197. 
With  the  reason  for  Hillsborough's  later  opposition  the  present  study 
is  not  concerned. 

104  Franklin  to  his  son,  October  n,  1766,  Works,  ed.  Bigelow,  IV, 
139,  quoted  above  in  note  63.  "In  case  your  Lordships  should  think 
it  right  to  advise  his  Majesty  to  establish  these  New  Governments,  you 
will  consider  whether  it  will  not  be  practicable  to  fall  upon  such  a  Plan 
as  will  avoid  great  part  of  the  Expense  incurred  by  the  Estimates 
of  the  New  Governments  established  after  the  Peace."  Shelburne  to 
Lords  of  Trade,  October  5,  1767,  B.  T.  Papers  (Hist.  Soc.  Pa.),  vol. 
XXVII;  and  N.  Y.  Col.  Docs.,  VII,  981. 


138  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  2763-2774 

overcome,  but  Hillsborough  was  not  of  that  opinion. 
Writing  to  Gage  shortly  after  the  issuance  of  the  report  he 
dwelt  at  considerable  length  upon  the  necessity  of  avoiding 
an  increased  expense  on  any  account :  105  "  It  appears  to 
his  Majesty  that  in  the  present  state  of  the  Kingdom  its 
future  Safety  and  Welfare  do  in  great  measure  depend  upon 
the  relieving  it  from  every  Expence  that  is  not  an  absolute 
necessity,  and  therefore  though  his  Majesty  applauds  the 
Motives  which  induced  the  first  Institution  of  the  present 
plan  of  Indian  Superin tendency ,  which  was  evidently  cal- 
culated to  regain  the  Confidence,  and  combine  the  Force 
of  the  Savages  against  a  then  powerful  Enemy,  yet,  as  in 
the  present  State  of  America,  the  main  object  of  that  Plan, 
if  not  entirely  removed  are  at  least  greatly  diminished  .  .  . 
His  Majesty  concurs  in  opinion  with  his  Board  of  Trade, 
that  the  laying  aside  that  part  of  it  [the  Plan  of  Superin- 
tendency]  which  relates  to  the  Indian  Trade  and  entrust- 
ing the  entire  management  of  that  Trade  to  the  colonies 
themselves  will  be  of  Publick  Utility  and  Advantage,  as  a 
means  of  avoiding  much  Difficulty  and  saving  much  Ex- 
pense to  this  Country  both  in  present  and  in  future  .  .  . 
The  Propriety  therefore  of  entrusting  the  Management  of 
the  Trade  with  the  Indians  to  the  Colonies,  does  .  .  .  ap- 
pear to  His  Majesty  to  depend  in  great  measure  upon  a  re- 
duction of  such  Posts  in  the  Indian  Country,  as  are  by  their 
situation,  exposed  to  the  Resentment  of  the  Savages,  it 
being  evident  that  in  Proportion  as  the  number  of  such 
Posts  is  diminished,  the  Necessity  of  carrying  on  an  Indian 
War  at  the  Expense  of  this  Kingdom  will  be  less.  .  .  . 
His  Majesty  has  not  failed  in  this  great  and  extensive  Con- 
sideration to  give  due  attention  to  Propositions,  which  have 

106  April  15,  1768,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  124. 


SCHEMES  FOR  COLONIZATION  139 

been  made  with  regard  to  the  Establishments  on  the  Rivers 
Mississippi,  Ohio  and  Illinois.  But  as  his  Majesty  has 
doubts  concerning  the  Utility  of  Establishments  in  such  re- 
mote situations,  which  consequently  cannot  be  kept  up, 
but  at  an  immense  Expence,  it  is  the  King's  pleasure  that 
you  should  report  your  Opinion  with  regard  to  the  con- 
tinuance of  any  of  the  Forts  in  those  situations.  .  .  ."106 

It  should  be  noted  that  in  the  report  of  the  Board  of 
Trade  in  1768  great  emphasis  is  placed  upon  the  general 
commercial  and  political  inutility  of  the  proposed  colonies, 
but  there  is  no  suggestion  that  the  matter  of  expense  stood 
in  the  way.  On  the  other  hand  there  is  an  intimation  that 
the  clause  in  the  proclamation  of  1763,  reserving  the  in- 
terior country  for  the  use  of  the  Indians,  was  inserted  there 
on  the  principle  that  all  settlements  should  be  confined  to 
the  sea- coast.  Again  in  a  similar  report  in  1772  against 

ice  A  few  Weeks  later  Gage  replied  to  Hillsborough :  "  From  what 
has  been  represented  your  Lordship  will  perceive  that  I  am  not  of 
opinion  that  a  Post  at  the  Illinois  will  be  productive  of  adrantages 
equal  to  the  expence  of  supporting  it."  June  16,  1768,  P.  R.  O.,  Am. 
and  W.  I.,  vol.  124.  Two  years  later  he  again  wrote  to  Hillsborough: 
"  I  conceive  that  to  procure  all  the  commerce  it  will  afford  and  at  as 
little  expence  to  ourselves  as  we  can,  is  the  only  object  we  should  have 
in  view  in  the  interior  Country  for  a  century  to  come  ...  I  am  of 
opinion  the  advantages  we  might  propose  to  gain  from  Civil  and  Mili- 
tary Establishments  at  the  mouths  of  those  Rivers  [Ohio  and  Illinois] 
would  be  greatly  disproportionate  to  the  Expences,  they  would  be  at- 
tended with."  November  10,  1770,  ibid.,  vol.  126.  Hillsborough 
writes  in  the  same  year:  "Forts  and  Military  Establishments  at  the 
mouths  of  the  Ohio  and  Illinois  Rivers,  admitting  that  they  would  be 
effectual  to  the  attainment  of  the  objects  in  view  would  yet,  I  fear,  be 
attended  with  an  Expence  to  this  Kingdom  greatly  disproportionate  to 
the  advantages  to  be  gained  and  those  objections  to  Civil  Establish- 
ments which  I  have  above  stated,  do  weigh  so  strongly  against  that 
measure  in  the  scale  both  of  general  and  local  policy,  as  greatly  to  dis- 
courage that  idea."  The  latter  part  refers  to  his  argument  against  the 
commercial  utility  of  a  regular  settlement  in  the  West,  which  he  de- 
clared, "cannot  be  of  that  commercial  benefit  to  the  state  which  it 
would  be  of  in  other  places".  Hillsborough  to  Gage,  July  31,  1770, 
ibid. 


I40  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

the  proposed  Vandalia  or  Walpole  grant,107  emphasis  is 
placed  upon  that  clause ;  indeed  it  is  advanced  as  the  chief 
argument  for  the  rejection  of  the  proposition.108  But  no- 
where in  the  Hillsborough-Gage  correspondence  is  there 
the  slightest  intimation  that  Hillsborough  had  the  procla- 
mation of  1763  in  mind.  It  would  seem  reasonable  to  as- 
sume that  if  he  believed  that  the  clause  in  that  document 


10T  After  1 768  the  attention  of  land  and  colony  promoters  was  turned 
to  the  region  of  the  upper  Ohio  River  valley.  In  1768  the  long-pro- 
posed Indian  boundary  line  was  determined  at  the  treaty  of  Fort  Stan- 
wix  and  there  was  opened  up  for  colonization  a  wide  strip  of  territory 
in  that  region.  A  company  was  formed  in  the  same  year  for  the  estab- 
lishment of  a  colony,  some  of  the  members  being  Benjamin  Franklin, 
Thomas  Pownall,  Thomas  Walpole,  and  the  firm  of  Baynton,  Whar- 
ton  and  Morgan.  In  1770,  the  crown  was  petitioned  for  a  grant,  but 
in  1772  the  Board  of  Trade,  still  under  the  leadership  of  Hillsborough, 
reported  adversely.  This  report  called  forth  a  vigorous  answer  Jfrom 
Dr.  Franklin,  which  completely  demolished  the  arguments  of  Hills- 
borough.  His  successor,  Lord  Dartmouth,  began  at  once  to  make  ar- 
rangements for  the  establishment  of  a  colony,  but  the  whole  matter  was 
dropped  on  the  outbreak  of  the  American  Revolution.  For  a  full  ac- 
count see  Alden,  New  Governments  West  of  the  Alleghanies  before 
1780,  19-35.  The  following  writers  have  confused  the  Walpole  grant 
with  the  plan  of  1766:  Hinsdale,  Old  Northwest,  133;  Peyton,  Hist, 
of  Augusta  Co.,  Va.,  144  ff;  Fitzmaurice,  Life  of  Shelburne,  II,  31; 
Bigelow,  in  Franklin's  Works,  IV,  136;  Perkins,  Annals  of  the  West, 
127;  Adams,  Maryland's  Influence  upon  the  Land  Cessions  to  the 
U.  S.,  13. 

108  This  interpretation  by  Hillsborough  may  be  entirely  disregarded. 
He  was  not  responsible  for  that  particular  clause  in  the  proclamation. 
It  was  conceived  and  written  by  Lord  Shelburne  himself,  as  has  been 
pointed  out  by  Alvord,  "Genesis  of  the  Proclamation  of  1763",  in 
Mich.  Pioneer  and  Hist.  Colls.,  XXXVI,  31  ff.  He  has  shown  that 
Shelburne  did  not  have  in  mind  the  principle  of  confining  the  colonies 
to  the  sea-coast.  Coffin,  in  Province  of  Quebec  and  the  Am.  Rev, ,  428, 
and  Alden,  in  New  Governments  West  of  the  Alleghanies  before  1780, 
43-44,  have  also  rejected  Hillsborough 's  interpretation.  For  the  old 
view  that  the  proclamation  was  intended  to  confine  the  colonies  to  the 
sea-coast,  see  for  example  Hinsdale,  Old  Northwest,  ch.  VIII,  and  the 
same  author,  "The  Western  Land  Policy  of  the  British  Government 
from  1763  to  1775",  in  Ohio  Archaeological  and  Historical  Quarterly, 
December,  1887.  There  is  positive  proof  of  Shelburne's  position  in  a 
minute  submitted  by  him  to  the  cabinet  in  1767,  Lansdowne  MSS., 
vol.  L,  p.  185. 


SCHEMES  FOR  COLONIZATION  i4I 

stood  in  the  way,  some  mention  of  it  would  have  been  made 
in  his  many  communications  to  General  Gage  and  Sir  Wil- 
liam Johnson.  Nor  does  Franklin  intimate  it  in  any  of  his 
private  correspondence  on  the  subject.  In  order  to  justify 
his  position  with  some  appearance  of  legality,  it  is  probable 
that  Hillsbo rough  brought  forward  that  clause  in  the  procla- 
mation, which  had  been  interpreted  by  nearly  every  one 
else  as  merely  temporary  in  character. 

There  was  still  another  important  reason  for  the  rejection 
of  interior  settlements,  which  comes  to  light  in  contempo- 
rary correspondence,  but  which  is  not  contained  in  the  re- 
port of  the  Board  of  Trade.  During  this  period  Louisiana, 
with  New  Orleans  commanding  the  mouth  of  the  Mississippi 
River,  was  in  the  hands  of  Spain.  New  Orleans  was  practi- 
cally the  only  outlet  for  the  western  country,  and  it  was  the 
settled  conviction  of  many  that  so  long  as  it  remained  in 
the  possession  of  a  foreign  power,  it  was  useless  to  expect 
much  from  the  West.  In  1768  Lieutenant  George  Phyn 
of  the  regular  army  was  sent  from  Fort  Pitt  down  the  Ohio 
and  Mississippi  rivers  to  Mobile,  and  in  writing  to  Sir  Wil- 
liam Johnson  he  declared  that  the  country  in  and  about  the 
Illinois  region  would  never  be  settled  ' '  with  any  advantage 
to  England  "  unless  New  Orleans  were  procured.109 

In  a  communication  to  Secretary  Hillsborough  in  1770, 
in  which  he  argued  at  length  against  the  establishment  of 
settlements  or  of  any  additional  military  posts  in  the  West, 
General  Gage  declared  that  no  further  time  or  money  should 

109  April  15,  1768,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol.  XXV,  no.  109.  He  affirmed 
that  a  settlement  "will  never  happen  with  any  advantage  to  England 
until  we  can  procure  the  Ideal  Island  of  Orleans :  .  .  .  could  we  find 
passage  for  even  small  craft  to  go  to  the  Sea,  the  Country  of  the  Illinois 
would  be  worthy  of  attention,  but  had  we  the  Island  of  Orleans,  that 
country  would  in  a  very  short  time  I  believe  be  equal  to  any  of  our 
Colonies."  Ibid, 


r42  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

be  expended  on  that  country,  and  particularly  the  Illinois 
country,  because  it  would  be  of  no  conceivable  "  advantage 
to  the  King's  subjects,  unless  New  Orleans  was  added  to 
His  Majesty's  Possessions  ". uo 

In  the  same  year  Lord  Hillsborough  himself  mentioned 
one  of  the  chief  objections  which  he  considered  to  ' '  lie 
against  Colonies  in  the  Illinois  with  a  view  to  the  Peltry 
Trade,  which  is  the  peculiar  Commerce  of  that  Country." 
"This  Commerce",  he  affirmed,  "cannot  (I  apprehend) 
be  useful  to  Great  Britain  otherwise  than  as  it  furnishes  a 
material  for  her  Manufactures,  but  it  will  on  the  contrary 
be  prejudicial  to  her  in  proportion  as  other  Countries  obtain 
that  material  from  us  without  its  coming  here  first ;  and 
whilst  New  Orleans  is  the  only  Port  for  Exportation  of  what 
goes  down  the  Mississippi,  no  one  will  believe  that  that  town 
will  not  be  the  market  for  Peltry  or  that  those  Restrictions, 
which  are  intended  to  secure  the  Exportation  of  that  Com- 
modity directly  to  G.  Britain,  can  have  any  effect  under 
such  circumstances."  m 

In  this  connection  it  should  be  noted  that  throughout 
this  decade  there  were  serious  thoughts  of  an  attack  upon 
Louisiana  and  New  Orleans  should  a  war  with  Spain  afford 
the  opportunity.  One  of  the  reasons  offered  by  Governor 
Franklin  in  1766  for  the  establishment  of  a  colony  in  the 
Illinois  country  was  that  such  a  colony  would  enable  the 
English  to  get  possession  of  the  whole  of  Louisiana  ' '  should 
a  future  war  make  it  expedient". 112  We  find  Gage  himself 
discussing  with  General  Haldimand,  who  was  stationed  in 


110 November  10,  1770,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  126. 

111  Hillsborough  to  Gage,  July  31,  1770,  ibid. 

111  Reasons  for  the  Establishment  of  a  Colony,  Franklin  Papers  (Am. 
Phil.  Soc.),  vols.  XXVII,  XXVIII;  same  idea  expressed  in  Remarks 
on  Lord  Barrington's  Plan,  no.  2,  Lansdowne  MSS.,  vol.  L,  p.  80. 


SCHEMES  FOR  COLONIZATION 


143 


West  Florida  during  the  latter  half  of  this  period ,  possible 
plans  for  an  attack  in  case  war  should  be  declared.  u 

In  1770  the  cherished  opportunity  seemed  to  have  ar- 
rived. In  that  year  the  dispute  between  England  and 
Spain  over  the  possession  of  certain  of  the  Falkland  Islands , 
lying  near  the  Strait  of  Magellan,  brought  the  two  nations 
to  the  verge  of  war.114  Hillsborough  evidently  expected 
war,  for  in  January,  1771 ,  he  communicated  secret  instruc- 
tions to  Gage  in  New  York115  to  mobolize  an  army  and  to 
prepare  for  the  invasion  of  Louisiana.  He  commissioned 
Gage  as  commander  of  the  invading  forces  and  instructed 
him  to  use  his  own  judgment  as  to  the  time  and  method  of 
attack.  Gage  replied116  that  he  would  at  once  assemble  a 
body  of  troops  and  prepare  for  the  invasion.  He  further 

113  Hamilton,  Colonial  Mobile,  2-29.  The  English  officers  in 
West  Florida  were  instructed  to  inform  Gage  as  to  the  number  of  troops 
and  inhabitants  the  Spaniards  might  bring  to  Louisiana,  and  whether 
any  of  the  old  French  colonial  troops  entered  the  Spanish  service,  Gage 
to  Brigadier  Taylor,  June  10,  1766;  B.  M.  Add.  MSS.,  21,  662,  fol. 
214.  In  1767,  General  Haldimand  sent  Captain  Marsh  from  Pensacola 
to  New  Orleans  to  make  a  special  inquiry  relative  to  the  British  trade, 
the  disposition  of  the  French  and  Acadians  towards  the  Spanish,  and 
the  treatment  of  the  Indians  and  French  by  the  Spaniards,  J.  Marsh  to 
Haldimand,  November  20,  1767,  ibid.,  21,  728.  The  keenest  interest 
was  always  taken  in  the  movements  of  the  Spanish,  especially  with  ref- 
erence to  how  many  troops  were  to  be  sent  up  the  Mississippi  and  how 
many  and  what  ports  on  that  river  were  to  be  garrisoned.  See  for  ex- 
ample, Captain  Innis  to  Haldimand,  October  n,  1769,  Can.  Arch., 
series  B,  vol.  69,  p.  60.  Haldimand  wrote  to  Gage,  June  12,  1770, 
that  "  although  on  the  one  hand  the  military  Force,  which  you  are  in- 
formed General  O'Reilly  intends  to  leave  in  the  Colony,  is  too  small  to 
create  much  alarm,  yet  on  the  other  the  appointment  of  a  Company  of 
French  under  the  Command  of  an  Active  French  Officer  for  the  upper 
Posts  of  the  Mississippi  is  a  circumstance  that  wears  a  suspicious  appear- 
ance." P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  126. 

1U  Hunt,  Pol.  Hist,  of  £ng.,  X,  112-114. 

118  January  2,  1771,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  127.  See  Docu- 
mentary Appendix,  no.  3. 

118  Gage  to  Hillsborough,  April  2,  1771,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I., 
vol.  127.  See  Documentary  Appendix,  no.  4. 


144  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

declared  his  intention  of  approaching  Louisiana  and  New 
Orleans  by  way  of  the  Ohio  and  Mississippi  rivers,  and 
actually  sent  reinforcements  to  Fort  de  Chartres.117  Soon 
after  the  despatch  of  Hillsborough,  however,  Spain  acceded 
to  the  demands  of  England,  and  the  attack  upon  New 
Orleans  was  given  up. 118 

In  conclusion  it  may  be  observed  that  after  1768  the 
attention  of  those  most  interested  in  the  colonizing  of 
Illinois  was  turned  in  another  direction.  In  that  year,  at 
the  treaty  of  Fort  Stanwix,  the  boundary  line  between  the 
Indians  and  the  whites  was  determined,  thus  opening  for 
settlement  a  large  tract  of  land  in  the  region  south  of  the 
Ohio  River.  There  was  formed  in  the  same  year  a  com- 
pany, called  the  Walpole  or  Vandalia  Company,  for  the 
purpose  of  establishing  a  colony  there.  Although  Hills- 
borough  again  opposed  the  scheme,  he  was  overruled,  and 
the  grant  was  made.  But  the  Revolution  put  an  end  to 
further  progress  in  the  scheme.  In  the  Illinois  country 
there  was  another  revival  of  land  speculation  in  1773, 
which,  however,  was  simply  an  attempt  of  individuals  and 
companies  to  purchase  large  tracts  of  land  from  the  Indians 
without  applying  to  the  crown,  a  proceeding  manifestly 
contrary  to  the  proclamation  of  I763.119 

117  "  I  have  advices  that  the  Artillery  and  Stores  sent  down  the  Ohio 
for  Fort  Chartres,  have  got  into  the  Mississippi,  and  were  going  up  to 
the  Fort.     The  prospect  of  a  war  with  Spain  could  not  be  concealed, 
for  the  news  had  been  conveyed  by  many  hands."     Gage  to  Hills- 
borough,  August  6,  1771,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  127. 

118  Gage  to  Hillsborough,  March  7,  1771,  ibid. 

119  It  is  of  interest  to  note  that  in  1770,  Dr.  Connolly,  a  nephew  of 
George  Croghan,  and  a  prominent  land  speculator  in  the  West,  pro- 
posed to  George  Washington  that  a  colony  ought  to  be  erected  south  of 
the  Ohio  River,  "  to  be  bounded  ...  by  the  Ohio  northward,  and 
westward,  the  ridge  that  divides  the  waters  of  the  Tennessee  or  Chero- 
kee River  southward  and  westward,  and  a  line  to  be  run  from  the  falls 
of  Ohio,  or  above,  so  as  to  cross  the  Shawna  River  above  the  fork  of 
it".     "  Washington's  Tour  on  the  Ohio  ",  Writings,  ed.  Ford,  II,  315, 


CHAPTER  VII. 

THE  STRUGGLE  FOR  A  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT,  1770-1774. 

THE  action  of  Commandant  Wilkins  in  abolishing  the 
court  of  judicatory  and  in  assuming  again  all  judicial 
powers, l  aroused  the  French  people  in  Illinois  to  take  a 
decided  stand  for  their  rights.  From  this  time  they  ceased 
to  depend  on  their  English  associates,  whose  actions  were 
often  inspired  by  selfish  motives,  and  who  were  frequently 
connected  with  the  speculative  schemes  of  the  eastern 
merchants  for  exploiting  the  country  by  means  of  American 
settlers.  The  French  people  perceived  that  their  interests 
would  not  be  subserved  by  such  measures,  and  that  they 
might  fulfill  by  themselves  along  different  lines  what  had 
been  in  the  minds  of  the  English  speculators.  Under  the 
administration  of  Lord  Hillsborough,  the  great  opponent  of 
western  expansion,  restriction  seemed  to  have  become  a 
permanent  policy,  and  by  1770  many  of  the  English 
traders,  who  had  been  interested  in  the  promoters'  schemes, 
had  become  disheartened  and  were  leaving  Illinois.  The 
plan  of  a  French  colony  appeared  to  be  justified,  however, 
by  the  actual  settlements  in  existence,  and  the  French 
leaders  might  reasonably  hope  that,  proper  representations 
being  made  to  the  ministry,  no  opposition  to  the  creation 

1  See  above,  ch.  IV,  p.  72.  Regular  sessions  of  a  court  were  held 
from  July,  1770,  to  January  30,  1773,  but  there  were  no  regular  judges, 
and  the  judgments  were  those  of  the  military  commandants,  see  MS. 
Court  Record  (Chester,  Illinois). 

145 


146  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

of  a  French  colonial  government  on  the  Mississippi  would  be 
met. 

It  was  with  this  idea  in  mind  that  the  leaders  of  the 
French  inhabitants  called  an  assembly  on  August  24,  1770, 
shortly  after  the  downfall  of  the  court.2  Daniel  Bloiiin,  a 
citizen  of  Kaskaskia,  was  chosen  to  go  to  New  York  and 
explain  the  situation  to  General  Gage.5  He  took  with  him 
a  document  enumerating  some  of  the  grievances  of  the 
people  against  the  military  commandant  and  certain  of  the 
English  merchants,4  and  instructions  to  use  all  possible 
efforts  to  obtain  the  promise  of  a  civil  government  for  the 
country.5  The  French  people  had  thus  advanced  beyond 
their  position  of  1768,"  and,  without  the  assistance  of  the 
resident  English,7  had  assumed  the  initiative  in  a  new 
movement  for  the  extension  of  civil  rights  to  the  colony. 

The  French  agent,  Daniel  Bloiiin,  chose  as  an  associate 
in  this  mission  William  Clazon,  a  Frenchman  with  some 
understanding  of  English  usages.8  Arriving  in  New  York 

8  MS.  Court  Record,  p.  108. 

*Ibid.t  p.  107;  Hamilton  to  Gage,  August  8,  1772,  P.  R.  O.,  Am. 
and  W.  I.,  vol.  128;  Gage  to  Dartmouth,  January  6,  1773,  ibid. 

*Gage  to  Hillsborough,  August  6,  1771*  ibid.t\o\.  127;  Gage  to 
Dartmouth,  January  6,  1773,  ibid.,vo\.  128;  Bloiiin  to  Dartmouth,  Oc- 
tober 6,  1773,  B-  T-  Papers  (Hist.  Soc.  Pa.),  vol.  XXXI. 

5 He  was  authorized  "a  faire  toutes  les  Demarches  legitimes  qui  '1 
conviendera  de  faire  en  notre  nom  pour  tacher  d'obtenir  de  son  Excel- 
lence Monsieur  le  Major  General  Thomas  Gage  .  .  .  le  redressement 
de  nos  Griefs,  et  Prier  sa  ditte  Excellence  .  .  .  d'  enterceder  Pour 
nous  aupres  de  sa  Majeste  afin  d'en  obtenir  1'Establissement  du 
Gouvernement  Civil  .  .  .  ):  MS.  Court  Record,  p.  107. 

6  See  above,  ch.  IV,  p.  60. 

7  There  is  no  trace  of  Morgan  in  Illinois  after  1770.     Many  others 
left  about  the  same  time,  see  Gage  to  Dartmouth,  May  5,  1773,  P.  R. 
O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  128. 

8Gage  to  Hillsborough,  August  6,  1771,  ibid.,  vol.  127.  Clazon's 
name  does  not  appear  as  a  resident  of  the  Illinois  villages,  nor  has  his 
name  been  located  in  the  Canadian  genealogical  registers.  For  Gage's 
estimate  of  Clazon  see  below,  p.  151. 


STRUGGLE  FOR  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT      147 

in  1771,  they  presented  their  credentials  and  memorial  to 
General  Gage  on  July  pth,9  and  prayed  that  a  civil  govern- 
ment be  established  in  the  Illinois  country.  Although  their 
reception  was  not  very  favorable,  Gage  finally  did  demand 
an  outline  of  their  plan.10  The  agents  set  to  work  to  pro- 
duce a  draft  of  government " — Gage  speaks  of  it  as  a  rough 

9Bloiiin  to  Dartmouth,  October  6,  1773,  B-  T-  Papers  (Hist.  Soc. 
Pa.),  vol.  XXXI.  The  exact  date  of  their  departure  from  Illinois  and 
arrival  in  New  York  does  not  appear.  September  3,  1770,  Bloiiin 
gave  power  of  attorney  to  continue  during  his  absence  to  Joseph 
Charleville,  his  father-in-law,  Louis  Viviat,  and  Pierre  Girardot,  Kas- 
kaskia  Record  Book,  British  Period.  He  was  still  in  Illinois  in  No- 
vember, 1770,  for  in  that  month  he  acted  as  attorney  for  Viviat,  ibid., 
p.  171.  It  is  probable  that  they  arrived  in  New  York  in  the  early 
summer  of  1771. 

10 Gage  to  Dartmouth,  January  6,  1773,  P»  R-  O->  Am.  an^  W.  I., 
vol.  128. 

11  This  episode  has  been  discussed  by  several  writers.  In  Hist,  of  U. 
S.,  IV,  741,  Bancroft  states  that  the  people  of  Illinois  met  together  and 
prepared  a  plan  of  government,  providing  for  institutions  like  those  of 
Connecticut,  which  was  forwarded  by  them  to  General  Gage  through 
their  agent  Daniel  Bloiiin.  This,  however,  is  an  error.  In  detailing 
the  account  of  his  negotiations  with  the  agents,  Gage  declared  that  "  he 
[Bloiiin]  presented  me  memorials  that  related  solely  to  complaints  of 
which  he  desired  redress,  but  delivered  no  memorials  containing  propo- 
sitions for  the  forming  of  a  Civil  Constitution  which  from  the  contents 
of  my  Dispatch,  Your  Lordship  was  led  to  conclude  I  had  received 
from  him.  The  people's  wishes  or  desires  of  a  Civil  Government  be- 
ing however,  mentioned,  gave  occasion  to  my  sending  afterwards  to 
Mr.  Bloiiin  and  his  associate  Mr.  Clazon  to  know  what  kind  of  Gov- 
ernment the  people  expected  and  w'd  be  satisfied  with  .  .  .  ;  and  re- 
ceived for  answer  that  it  would  require  a  great  deal  of  time  to  form  a 
plan  of  the  kind."  He  then  asked  for  a  brief  outline  of  their  plan, 
and  they  drew  up  a  "  rough  sketch  ",  Gage  to  Dartmouth,  January  6, 
1773,  P-  R-  O-»  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  128.  This  letter  was  in  answer 
to  that  of  John  Pownall,  one  of  the  under  secretaries,  who  wrote  on 
October  7,  1772:  "  I  think  it  necessary  in  the  absence  of  Lord  Dart- 
mouth who  is  at  present  in  the  Country,  to  acquaint  you  that  your  Dis- 
patch No.  76,  has  been  received  and  laid  before  the  King,  but  the 
regulations  for  a  Civil  Government  proposed  by  the  Inhabitants  of  the 
Illinois  .  .  .  were  not  included  in  your  Packet."  Ibid.,  and  Dart- 
mouth Papers,  Fourteenth  Report,  Royal  Hist.  MSS.  Comm.,  Ap- 
pendix X,  98.  Gage  answered  Pownall  as  follows:  "  You  had  good 


I48  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

outline — which  was  probably  the  work  of  Clazon,  for  the 
model  of  the  proposed  government  was  the  constitution  of 
Connecticut,12  the  most  liberal  of  the  eastern  colonies,  of 
which  the  average  Illinois  Frenchman  could  have  known 
nothing. 

Such  a  proposition  was  naturally  rejected  by  the  gen- 
eral,13 who,  in  order  to  gain  more  information  concerning 
their  actual  sentiments,  and  to  discredit,  if  possible,  the 
two  representatives,14  directed  Major  Hamilton,  the  acting 
commandant  in  Illinois,  to  sound  the  people  as  to  their 

Reasons  from  my  Letter  and  the  Extract  inclosed,  to  suppose  that  there 
had  been  an  Omission  in  not  transmitting  the  said  Proposals  of  the  In- 
habitants, but  I  never  received  them  from  Monsieur  Bloiiin  and  I  ex- 
plain that  matter  by  this  Opportunity  to  the  Earl  of  Dartmouth."  Jan- 
uary 6,  1773,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  128.  Bancroft's  error 
has  been  repeated  by  Mason,  Chapters  from  III.  Hist.,  282,  and  by 
Parrish,  Historic  III.,  158. 

12  Gage  to  Dartmouth,  January  6,  1773,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I., 
vol.  128. 

13  "  It  cannot  be  suggested  that  a  regular  Constitutional  Government 
can  be  established  amongst  a  people  who  are  settled  and  scattered  in  a 
far  distant  desert  .    .    .  They  don't  deserve  so  much  attention  or  ex- 
pence  ..."     Gage  to  Hillsborough,  March  4,  1772,  Sparks  MSS., 
XLIII,   vol.   3,  p.   164.     "They  were  told  propositions  of  that  sort 
would  not  be  received,  and  that  I  would  not  confer  with  them  on  the 
Subject  of  a  Government  to  be  so  constituted."     Gage  to  Dartmouth, 
January  6,  1773,  **•  R-  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  128.     The  proposal 
would  have  met  the  same  fate  had  it  been  carried  to  the  ministry,  for 
upon  hearing  of  the  movement,  Secretary  Hillsborough,  just  before  his 
retirement,  wrote  to  Gage:   "Some  arrangements  for  the  Inhabitants 
of  the  Illinois  Country  may  be  necessary,  but  as  I  agree  with  you  in 
opinion  that    a    regular  Constitutional   Government   for  that   District 
would  be  highly  improper,  I  am  not  without  apprehension  that  any 
Plan,  however  limited,  may  be  wrested  [sic]  to  bad  purposes,  and  will 
in  a  greater  or  less  degree  operate  to  fix  what  we  both  think  it  would 
be  better  to  remove."     July  I,  1772,  Sparks  MSS.,  LXIII,  vol.  3, 
p.  165. 

u  "  These  two  people  have  been  a  long  time  here,  and  are  not  to  be 
relied  on",  Gage  to  Haldimand,  June  3,  1773,  Can.  Arch.,  series  B, 
vol.  5,  p.  142.  See  also  Gage  to  Hillsborough,  September  2,  1772, 
P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  127,  and  Gage  to  Haldimand,  January 
5,  1774,  B.  M.,  Haldimand  Papers,  Corr.  with  Gage,  1758-1777, 
vol,  IV, 


STRUGGLE  FOR  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT       149 

wishes.15  The  commandant  was  likewise  requested  to  cir- 
culate among  the  French  a  plan  of  government  draughted 
by  Gage  himself,16  which  if  endorsed  by  them,  might  be 

15  Gage  to  Hillsborough,  April  13,  1772,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I., 
vol.  127. 

16  The  current  opinion  has  been  that  Lord  Dartmouth,  who  succeeded 
Hillsborough  as  secretary  for  the  colonies  in  August,  1772,  drew  up  the 
sketch  and  forwarded  it  through  Gage  to  Illinois.     Bancroft,  Hist,  of 
U.  S.,  IV,  472,  says  that  Dartmouth  "censured  the  ideas  of  the  in- 
habitants of  the  Illinois  District  with  regard  to  a  Civil  Constitution  .  .  . 
and  rejected  their  proposition  to  take  some  part  in  the  election  of  their 
rulers  ...  A  plan  of  Government  was  therefore  prepared  of  great  sim- 
plicity, leaving  all  power  with  the  executive  officers  of  the  crown,  ..." 
"  Dartmouth  prepared  and  forwarded  to  Illinois  what  he  called  a '  Sketch 
of  Government  for  Illinois'",  Mason,  Chapters  from  III.  Hist.,  283. 
"  His  [Hillsborough's]  successor,  Lord  Dartmouth,  took  a  similar  view, 
and  immediately  drew  up  what  he  termed   '  A  Sketch  of  Government 
for  Illinois  ',  and  returned  it  with  his  compliments,  into  the  western  wil- 
derness ..."     Parrish,  Historic  III.,  159.     The  statements  quoted 
are  quite  inaccurate.     Gage  wrote  to  Hillsborough  April  13,  1772,  as 
follows:   "  The  Officer  commanding  at  the  Illinois  .   .   .  is  directed  to 
sound  the  sentiments  of  the  people  on  the  subject  of  a  Civil  Govern- 
ment ...  I  sent  him  a  Sketch  of  what  I  proposed  which  I  have  now 
the  honour  to  transmit  Your  Lordship,  with  a  list  of  the  Officers  of  Gov- 
ernment and  their  respective  Salarys."     P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I., 
vol.  128.     There  is  an  abstract  (in  English)  of  the  sketch  in  the  Public 
Record  Office,  endorsed  as  having  been  inclosed  in  Gage's  letter  of 
the  13  of  April.     On  July  I  Gage  reported  to  the  secretary  that  he 
"  had  not   yet  received  an  answer  concerning   the  Government   pro- 
posed to  the  Inhabitants  of  Illinois",  ibid.     In  the  summer  of  1773 
Gage  was  summoned  to  England   to  give  the  government  informa- 
tion on  colonial  affairs  and  General  Haldimand  was  left  in  charge  of 
the  American  army  and  of  the  West.     October  6,  1773,  Bloiiin  wrote 
to  Dartmouth  from  New  York:   "That  worthy  general  had  scarcely 
departed  from  America,  when  a  secret  Enemy  to  his  Glory  .  .   .  found 
means  to  cause  the  Inhabitants  of  the  Illinois  to  be  assembled  by  the 
Commanding  Officer  there,  and  presented  with  an  anonymous  Writ- 
ing, which,  they  were  told,  came  from  the  General,  and  a  Plan  of 
the  Form  of  Government,  which  they  were  requested  to  solicit  through 
his  Intercession."      B.  T.  Papers  (Hist.  Soc.  Pa.),  vol.  XXXI.     A 
few  weeks  later  he  again  wrote  to  Dartmouth :  "I  have  delivered  to 
Gen'l  Haldimand  a  literal  Copy  of  the  Sketch  I  mentioned  to  your 
Lordship  in  the  letter  of  which  I  now  enclose  the  duplicate  with  another 
Copy  and  translation  of  that  Sketch."     November  4,  1773,  P.  R.  O. , 
Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  128.     It  is  curious  that  Bancroft  should  have 
made  the  mistake,  since  he  refers  to  other  portions  of  this  letter  in  his 
text,  and  there  is  among  his  manuscripts  a  copy  of  the  letter.     Note 


150  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

granted  by  the  ministry.  The  plan  "  contained  some  pop- 
ular elements,  but  provided  also  for  certain  appointive 
officers — a  governor  of  the  district,  and  a  magistrate  for 
each  of  the  villages  of  Kaskaskia  and  Cahokia,  and  one  for 
the  three  remaining  villages.  A  grand  council  was  to  be 
formed,  consisting  of  the  governor,  and  five  or  six  coun- 
cilors elected  by  the  inhabitants.  In  minor  civil  and  crim- 
inal cases  the  individual  magistrates  were  to  have  jurisdic- 
tion. The  "  Chamber  of  Kaskaskia  "  was  the  next  higher 
court,  consisting  of  three  magistrates  sitting  together. 
From  this  court  an  appeal  might  be  taken  to  the  grand 
council,  whose  decision  was  to  be  final.  The  governor  and 
council  were  also  to  legislate  for  the  better  government  of 

also  the  following  extract  of  a  letter  from  Gage  to  Haldimand,  written 
from  London,  January  5,  1774:  "  The  Paper  given  you  by  Bloiiin  and 
Clajon,  is  an  exact  Copy  of  that  I  sent  to  the  Illinois,  for  the  Com- 
mandant to  show  the  Inhabitants,  and  endeavour  to  persuade  them  to 
petition  for  a  Government  of  that  Nature."  B.  M.,  Haldimand  Papers, 
Corr.  with  Gage,  1758-1777,  vol.  IV.  For  another  declaration  from 
Gage  as  to  his  part,  see  Gage  to  Haldimand,  June  3,  1773,  Can.  Arch., 
series  B,  vol.  5,  p.  142.  It  may  be  observed  further  that  when  the  sketch 
of  government  was  drawn  up  and  sent  to  Illinois,  Lord  Dartmouth  had 
nothing  to  do  with  American  affairs.  He  did  not  take  charge  of  the 
colonial  office  until  August,  1772.  See  Appendix  to  Hunt's  Pol.  Hist, 

°f  E*S-»  X,  473- 

17  The  original  sketch,  in  French,  unsigned  and  undated,  is  among 
the  Kaskaskia  Papers.  There  is  also  a  copy  in  the  British  Museum, 
Add.  MSS.,  21,687,  subscribed  to  by  a  notary  public  in  Kaskaskia, 
June  13,  1773,  and  by  William  Clazon  in  New  York,  November  2, 
1773.  It  is  endorsed,  however,  as  being  a  "  Memoire  des  Habitants 
des  Illinois,  qui  fut  presente  par  Mess.  Bloiiin  et  Clargeon."  This 
copy  had  been  sent  by  the  inhabitants  of  Illinois  to  their  representatives 
in  New  York,  according  to  the  letter  of  Bloiiin  to  Dartmouth  cited 
above  in  note  9,  and  was  placed  by  them  in  Haldimand's  hands.  The 
endorsement  is  evidently  the  work  of  a  clerk,  who  did  not  understand 
the  situation,  and  has  caused  one  or  two  errors  to  be  made.  In  the 
calendar  of  Haldimand  Papers,  Can.  Arch.  Rept.,  1885,  203,  the 
document  is  described  as  a  ''  Memorial  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  Illinois 
for  a  Civil  Government,  presented  by  Messrs.  Bloiiin  and  Clargeon,  on 
the  3rd  of  November,  1773  (in  French)."  Coffin,  The  Province  of 
Quebec  and  the  Early  Am.  Rev.,  417,  n.  2,  takes  the  statement  in  the 
Can.  Arch.  Rept.  in  good  faith. 


STRUGGLE  FOR  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT      151 

the  country,  regulate  fees  for  the  support  of  the  courts,  and 
fines  for  certain  crimes,  which,  with  confiscations,  were  to 
be  applied  to  the  extra  expenses  of  the  government.  The 
estimated  expense  of  the  proposed  government  was  three 
hundred  and  nine  pounds,  seven  shillings  sterling  per 
annum.18 

In  pursuance  of  Gage's  orders  Commandant  Hamilton 
convened  the  principal  inhabitants  of  the  village  in  the  sum- 
mer of  1772,  and  addressed  them  on  the  subject  of  a  civil 
government.19  "  They  were  very  high  on  the  Occasion", 
however,  and  "  expected  to  appoint  their  Governor  and  all 
other  Civil  Magistrates."  20  Upon  being  requested  to  draw 
up  their  plan  in  writing  and  sign  it,  the  French  informed 
Hamilton  that  they  had  deputed  Daniel  Bloiiin  to  represent 
them  before  General  Gage,  and  that  until  they  could  learn 
what  success  he  had  met  with,  they  would  give  no  definite 
answer.21 

A  few  weeks  later  Gage  transmitted  to  Secretary  Hills- 
borough  the  following  account  of  the  negotiations  up  to  that 
time  :  ' '  An  answer  has  been  returned  to  the  Proposals  sent 
to  the  Illinois  for  the  arrangements  for  that  Country  with 
an  Account  of  the  motives  the  people  of  those  Settlements 
have  formed  of  a  Civil  Government ;  which  I  transmit  your 
Lordship  in  the  inclosed  Extract  of  a  Letter  from  Major 
Hamilton.  Those  ideas  were  given  them  by  the  Mons. 
Blotiin  mentioned  in  the  Major's  Letter,  or  rather  an  asso- 
ciate of  his  named  Clajon,  a  Frenchman  by  birth,  an  ad- 

18  "  Civil  Officers  for  the  Illinois",  in  General  Gage's  of  April  13, 
1772,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  127.     In  this  memorandum  Gage 
suggested  that  the  governor  receive  182  pounds  sterling  per  annum,  each 
of  the  magistrates  800  French  livres,  and  a  secretary  to  the  governor 
and  council  and  keeper  of  the  records  500  livres. 

19  Hamilton  to  Gage,  August  8,  1772,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I., 
vol.  127. 

*/#</. 


152  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  2763-1774 

venturer,  artful  and  intelligent,  who,  after  passing  some 
years  in  these  Colonies  went  to  the  Spanish  side  of  the  Mis- 
sissippi and  during  his  residence  in  the  Colonies,  he  learnt 
the  English  language  and  got  a  shallow  knowledge  of  our 
Laws.  Those  two  People  came  to  me  from  the  Illinois 
about  twelve  Months  ago ;  but  from  their  character ,  the 
disturbance  they  had  occasioned  in  the  Country,  and  the 
extravagant  proposals  they  brought,  I  refused  to  enter  into 
any  Conference  with  them  on  subjects  that  had  relation  to 
Civil  Government."22 

Although  Gage  apparently  gave  the  French  leaders  little 
encouragement,  they  had  hope  that  in  time  some  sort  of 
civil  government  would  be  established.  During  the  visit  of 
the  French  representatives  in  New  York  there  was  published 
in  Philadelphia,  in  1772,  a  pamphlet  entitled  "  Invitation 
Serieuse  aux  Habitants  des  Illinois  ",  which  emanated  from 
some  member  of  the  French  party  seeking  a  new  govern- 
ment.23 The  writer  of  this  French  tract  urged  his  neighbors 
in  Illinois  to  shake  off  the  lethargy  which  had  so  long  en- 
veloped them,  and  win  economic  independence  for  the  col- 
ony. They  were  urged  to  follow  the  example  of  their  en- 
terprizing  friends  who  lived  among  them.  He  argued  that 
if  the  British  government  had  fully  understood  the  situation 
of  the  Illinois  French  who  had  not  as  yet  enjoyed  any  ben- 

22  September   2,   1772,  P.   R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  127.     Gage 
further  declares  that  "  Clazon  is  the  chief  mover,  and  puts  all  into  the 
mouth  of  Bloiiin,  and  since  his  residence  in  our  Provinces  is  become  a 
mere   Republican."     Gage  to  Haldimand,  January  5,   1774,  B.  M., 
Haldimand  Papers,  Add.  MSS.,  21,655.    ^n  a  letter  to  Haldimand,  June 
3»  J773>  Gage  wrote :   "  They  [Bloiiin  and  Clazon]  shewed  me  a  Sketch 
of  a   Republican  Government  two  years  ago,  which  they  were  told 
would  not  be  received."     Can.  Arch.,  series  B,  vol.  5,  p.  142. 

23  See  reprint  of  this  pamphlet  in  Publications  of  Club  for  Colonial 
Reprints,  IV,  with  introduction  and  notes  by  C.  W.  Alvord  and  C.  E. 
Carter,  wherein  an   attempt  is  made  to  trace  its  authorship  to  Bloiiin 
and  Clazon. 


STRUGGLE  FOR  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT      153 

efits  from  becoming  English  subjects,  it  would  long  since 
have  granted  them  a  civil  government.  He  also  prophesied 
that  in  a  short  time  the  right  to  enjoy  their  religion  would 
be  confirmed  and  a  civil  government  established. 

The  French  party  failed,  however,  to  obtain  a  government 
along  the  lines  applied  for.24  Not  only  was  Lord  Hillsborough 
opposed  to  it,  but  his  successer  Lord  Dartmouth  declared 
himself  against  such  a  popular  form  of  government.  Writ- 
ing to  Gage  March  3,  1772,  he  explained  his  position: 
' '  The  Propositions  toward  forming  a  Government  for  the 
Illinois  Country,  suggested  to  you  long  ago  by  the  Inhabi- 
tants of  that  District  were  certainly  in  the  outline  of  them 
too  absurd  and  extravagant  to  afford  the  least  ground  for 
consideration."  25 

The  attention  of  the  authorities  had  been  called,  how- 
ever, to  the  needs  of  the  Illinois  villages  :  indeed  for  a  num- 
ber of  years  considerable  thought  had  been  given  to  their 
disposition.  The  idea  was  at  times  advanced  of  removing 

2i  Compare  this  movement  with  the  proposals  of  Major  Robert  Rogers 
to  erect  a  civil  government  at  Michilimakinac  in  1767.  In  a  long  re- 
port on  Indian  and  trade  conditions  at  the  northern  post  Major  Rogers 
declares  that  the  only  remedy  for  existing  evils  is  to  establish  a  govern- 
ment there.  He  proposes  that  "  Michillimackinac  and  its  depend- 
encies, should  be  erected  into  a  Civil  Government;  with  a  Governer, 
Lieutenant  Governer,  and  a  Council,  of  Twelve;  chose  out  of  the 
Principal  Merchants,  that  carry  on  this  valuable  branch  of  Trade  [fur- 
trade]  with  Power  to  enact,  such  Laws  as  may  be  necessary  and  these 
be  transmitted  to  the  king,  etc.,  for  Approbation:  That  the  Governer, 
should  be  Agent  for  the  Indians,  and  Commandant  of  the  Troops,  that 
may  be  ordered  to  Garrison  the  Fort  ..."  In  a  closing  paragraph 
he  says:  "Whereas  by  the  propos'd  Plan,  all  are  under  a  Civil  Power 
and  ye  Gov.  Commandant  of  the  Troops,  and  Agent  to  the  Indians — 
Which  wou'd  cause  every  Branch  to  be  countenanc'd  for  the  mutual 
safety  of  each  other."  "Journal  of  Major  Rogers' Proceedings  with 
the  Indians  at  the  Garrison  of  Michilimakinac  from  May  the  24th  to 
July  23d,  1767",  MS.  in  Am.  Antiq.  Soc.  Lib. 

25  Dartmouth  to  Gage,  March  3,  1773,  B.  M.,  Haldimand  Papers, 
Add.  MSS.,  21,697.  For  the  same  opinion,  see  same  to  same,  Novem- 
ber 4,  1772,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  128. 


154  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

all  the  inhabitants  from  Illinois  to  Canada.26  Although  this 
was  deemed  impracticable,27  it  may  nevertheless  be  said  that 
the  government  was  thoroughly  anxious  to  reach  a  satisfac- 
tory solution  of  the  problem.  Secretary  Hillsborough  was 
fully  aware  of  the  situation  and  was  awakened  to  the  neces- 
sity of  taking  some  steps,  for  in  1769  he  declared  that  "  if 
the  case  of  these  settlements  had  been  well  known  or  under- 
stood at  the  time  of  forming  the  conquered  Lands  into 
Colonies,  some  provision  would  have  been  made  for  them, 
and  they  would  have  been  erected  into  distinct  Govern- 
ments or  made  dependent  upon  those  Colonies  of  which 
they  were  either  the  offspring,  or  with  which  they  did  by 
circumstances  and  situation,  stand  connected.  I  shall  not 
fail,  therefore,  to  give  this  matter  the  fullest  consideration 
when  the  business  of  the  Illinois  Country  is  taken  up."28 
We  find  his  successor,  Lord  Dartmouth,  expressing  the 
opinion  in  1772  that  the  "  state  of  the  Illinois  District  ap- 
pears to  me  in  every  light  in  which  it  is  viewed  to  require  a 
very  serious  consideration,  and  I  will  not  fail  to  collect  as 
soon  as  possible  those  informations  which  may  enable  me 
to  form  a  judgment,  as  well  of  the  arrangements  which  have 
been  already  made  respecting  that  Country,  as  of  those 
which  may  be  further  necessary,  considering  it  in  a  light  of 
a  Colony  of  the  King's  subjects."29  And  more  emphati- 
cally still  a  little  later  he  wrote  :  "It  has  always  appeared, 

26  Hillsborough  to  Gage,  December  4,  1771,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W. 
I.,  vol.    127;   Gage  to   Hillsborough,  March  4,  1772,  Sparks  MSS., 
XLIII,  vol.  3,  p.  165. 

27  "  I  fear  there  are  but  too  many  obstacles  to  such  a  measure,  and 
therefore  it  will  be  the  more  necessary  to  consider  whether  any  per- 
manent plan  ought  to  be  adopted ."     Hillsborough  to  Gage,  December 
4,  1771,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  126. 

28  Letter  to  Gage,  December  9,  1769,  ibid.,  vol.  124. 
a*  Letter  to  Gage,  November  4,  ibia.,  vol.  128. 


STRUGGLE  FOR  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT      155 

and  does  still  appear  to  me,  that  if  those  Inhabitants  have 
(as  I  conceive  they  have)  a  Right,  under  the  Treaty  of 
Paris  to  continue  in  their  possessions,  it  is  both  dangerous 
and  disgraceful  to  leave  that  District  without  such  Regula- 
tions as  may  on  the  one  hand  insure  to  the  Inhabitants  that 
Protection  in  their  Civil  Rights  which  they  are  entitled  to 
expect,  as  on  the  other  hand  to  secure  their  Allegiance  as 
Subjects.  I  shall,  therefore,  think  it  my  Duty  to  make  this 
an  Object  of  my  attention."30 

In  the  meantime  events  were  taking  place  in  Illinois 
which  changed  somewhat  the  attitude  of  the  people.  Under 
the  administration  of  Wilkins  the  people  had  evidently  suf- 
fered a  good  many  indignities.  Moreover,  at  the  begin- 
ning of  his  regime  we  have  seen  that  he  did  not  look  with 
disfavor  upon  the  questionable  operations  of  one  of  the 
great  trading  companies  in  Illinois ,  inasmuch  as  his  private 
interests  were  being  subserved  at  the  same  time.  But 
eventually  his  connection  with  Baynton,  Wharton  and 
Morgan  was  broken,  and  party  factions  began  to  form. 
From  1770  to  1772  the  whole  country  was  apparently 
torn  by  party  strife.31  Wilkins  also  attempted  to  enrich 
himself  at  the  expense  of  the  government  by  falsify- 
ing his  accounts  and  by  misappropriating  large  sums  of 
money.8'2  Finally  the  officers  of  his  regiment  preferred 

30  Letter  to  Gage,  March  3,  1773,  B.  M.,  Add.  MSS.,  21,697. 

81  "  There  has  been  a  strange  work  at  Illinois,  very  bad  Proceedings 
carried  on — indeed  most  shameful  ones.     A  Quarrel  amongst  them  has 
laid  open  scandalous  Scenes,  and  able  is  Faction."     Gage  to  Haldi- 
mand,  September  13,  1771,  ibid.,  21,655. 

82  Engineer  Hutchins  to  Captain  Sowers,  April  8,  1771,  ibid.;  Gage 
to  Haldimand,  September  13,  1771,  ibid.',   Gage  to  Wilkins,  Septem- 
ber 16,  1771,  Can.  Arch.,  series  B,  vol.  5,  p.  50;   Captain  Sowers  to 
Gage,  September  17,  1771,  ibid.;   Gage  to  Haldimand,  June  9,  1772, 
ibid.,  p.  103.     For  a  denial  by  Wilkins  see  Wilkins  to  Gage,  April  7, 
1772,  ibid.,  p.  76. 


156  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

serious  charges  against  him,33  and  he  was  dismissed  from 
the  service  in  September,  I772.34  His  successor,  however, 
did  not  arrive  until  the  following  spring,  after  which  Wil- 
kins  sailed  for  England.35  Major  Isaac  Hamilton  took 
charge  of  the  fort  temporarily,36  but  was  relieved  in  a  few 
weeks  by  Captain  Hugh  Lord,37  who  took  up  his  post  at 
Fort  Gage,  near  Kaskaskia,  because  Commandant  Hamil- 
ton,38 acting  under  orders  from  Gage,39  had  destroyed  Fort 
de  Chartres  on  account  of  the  ravages  of  the  Mississippi 
River.40  During  the  next  two  years  the  relation  between 

83  Gage  to  Haldimand,   September  I,   1773,  B.  M.,  Add.   MSS., 
21,655. 

84  Gage  to  Haldimand,  September  13,  1771,  ibid. 

35  Haldimand  to  Gage,  July  14,  1772,  Can.  Arch.,  series  B,  vol.  5, 
p.  109. 

36  Gage  to  Hillsborough,  July  i,  1772,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I., 
vol.  128.     There  is  but  one  document,  aside  from  a  letter,  in  which 
Hamilton  signs  himself  as  commandant  in  Illinois.     June  6,  1772,  he 
approves  the  decision  of  an  arbitration  court,  Kaskaskia  Record  Book, 
p.  1 80. 

37  Gage  to  Hillsborough,  September  2,  1772,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W. 
I.,  vol.  128. 

"Thomas  Willing  to  Haldimand,  July  6,  1772,  B.  M.,  Add.  MSS., 
21,721;  Gage  to  Hillsborough,  September  2,  1772,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and 
W.  I.,  vol.  128;  Gage  to  Johnson,  September  4, 1772,  General  Gage's 
Letters,  Harvard  College  Library;  Gage  to  Haldimand,  June  3,  1773, 
Can.  Arch.,  series  B,  vol.  5,  p.  142. 

39  Cabinet  Minute,  December  I,  1771,  Dartmouth  Papers,  Fourteenth 
Report,  Royal  Hist.  MSS.  Commission,  Appendix  X,  81;  Hillsborough 
to  Gage,  December  4,  1771,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  127;  Gage 
to  Hillsborough,   March  4,   1772,  Sparks  MSS.,    XLIII,  vol.    3,    p. 
165;  Gage  to  Haldimand,  March  16,  1772,  Can.  Arch.,  series  B,  vol. 
5,  p.  73;    Gage  to  Hillsborough,  April  13,  1772,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and 
W.    I.,  vol.  128.     The  current  opinion  has  heretofore  been  that  the 
Mississippi  floods  destroyed  the  fort.     See  any  State  history  for  state- 
ment to  that  effect. 

40  For  an  account  of  the  anxiety  felt  for  the  security  of  the  fort,  and 
of  the  various  attempts  to  secure  it,  see  Wilkins  to  Gage,  September  13, 
1768,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  124;   Gage  to  Hillsborough, 
January  6,  1770,  ibid.,  vol.   126;   same  to  same,  December  7,  1770, 
ibid.',  Hillsborough  to  Gage,  February  u,  1771,  ibid.,  vol.  127;   same 
to  same,  July  3,  1771,  ibid. 


STRUGGLE  FOR  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT      157 

commandant  and  people  was  greatly  altered.  Captain 
Lord  entered  upon  a  policy  of  conciliation,  and  in  a  short 
time  won  the  confidence  and  respect  of  the  inhabitants,41 
with  the  result  that  their  clamor  for  a  change  of  government 
was  considerably  minimized.  The  tact  which  he  displayed 
in  his  relations  with  the  French,  and  his  boldness  in  deal- 
ing with  the  Indian  nations42  likewise  elicited  the  com- 
mendation both  of  the  commanding  general  and  of  the 
home  authorities.43  The  abuses  and  disorders  of  previous 
years  had  been  largely  a  matter  of  controversy  and  mutual 
accusation,  but  with  the  removal  of  Wilkins,  and  the  ejec- 

41  See  for  example,  letter  of  Daniel  Bloiiin  to  Dartmouth,  October  6, 

1773,  wherein  he  speaks  of  Captain  Lord  as  acting  "  so  fairly  ",  B.  T. 
Papers  (Hist.   Soc.  Pa.),  vol.  XXXI.     The  Kaskaskia  Records  show 
no  evidence  of  the  least  hostility  to  Lord,  and  the  official  correspon- 
dence likewise  reveals  no  proof  of  friction. 

42  The  period  from  1772  to  1774  was  a  critical  one  in  Indian  affairs 
throughout  the  West.     In  1774  occurred  the  Dunmore  War,  involving 
the  borders  of  Pennsylvania  and  Virginia,  and  at  the  same  time  all  the 
western  Indians  were  extremely  uneasy.     Murders  and  raids  were  es- 
pecially frequent  in  Illinois.     For  illustrations  of  this  and  of  Com- 
mandant Lord's  conduct,   see  Lord   to  Gage,  April  20,   1772,  Can. 
Arch.,  series  B,  vol.  27,  p.  204;   Letter  of  Charles  Stuart,  May  I,  1772, 
tbid.,  vol.  12,  p.  118;  Gage  to  Hillsborough,  May  6,  1772,  P.  R.  O., 
Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.   128;  Gage  to   Johnson,  May  12,  1772,  General 
Gage's  Letters,  Harvard  College  Library;   Hamilton  to  Stuart,  May  29, 
1772,  Can.  Arch.,  series  B,  vol.  12,  p.   75;   Lord  to  Stuart,  May  30, 

1772,  ibid.,   p.    77;  Gage  to  Johnson,  September  4,   1772,  General 
Gage's  Letters;   Dartmouth  to  Gage,  November  4,   1772,  P.   R.   O., 
Am.   and  W.    I.,  vol.   128;   Gage  to  Johnson,  December  15,  1772, 
General  Gage's  Letters;   Gage  to  Johnson,  March  31,   1773,  ibid.; 
same  to  same,  April  25,  1773,  ibid.;   Lord  to  Gage,  April  20,  1773, 
B.  M.,  Add.  MSS.,  21,687;   Gage  to  Dartmouth,  June  2,  1773,  P.  R. 
O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.   128;   Haldimand  to  Gage,  August  31,  1773, 
Can.  Arch.,  series  B,  vol.  5,  p.  182;  Haldimand  to  Dartmouth,  August 
31,  1773,  B.  M.,  Add.  MSS.,  21,695;   Dartmouth  to  Johnson,  Decem- 
ber  i,   1773,  N.    Y.    Col.  Docs.,  VIII,  404;  letter  to  Gage,  July  3, 

1774,  Can.  Arch.,  series  B,  vol.   5,  p.   280;   letter  to  Charles  Stuart, 
July  22,  1774,  ibid.,  vol.  12,  p.  388. 

4SGage  to  Dartmouth,  February  8,  1773,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I., 
vol.  128;  same  to  same,  May  5,  1773,  ibid.;  same  to  same,  June  2, 

1773,  ibid.;   Dartmouth  to  Haldimand,  December  I,  1773,  Johnson 
MSS.,  vol.  XXV.no.  221. 


158  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

tion  from  the  country  of  the  English  and  French  concerned 
in  the  disputes,44  complaints  became  less  frequent.45 

The  government  was  anxious,  nevertheless,  to  displace 
the  military  government  by  one  more  suited  to  the  needs 
of  the  people.  Although  the  constitution  proposed  by  the 
French  representatives  was  not  acceptable,  the  authorities 
were  willing  to  establish  one  along  the  lines  suggested  by 
Gage  in  I772,46  which  was  certainly  an  improvement  over 
the  military  government  and  over  the  system  under  which 
they  had  lived  during  the  French  regime.  Gage  ordered 
the  commandant,  therefore,  to  give  the  people  another  trial 
and  to  intimate  to  them  that  their  request  for  a  govern- 
ment of  such  a  character  would  be  favorably  received, 
provided  their  petition  be  forwarded  from  Illinois  through 
the  regular  military  channels.47  But  the  changed  condi- 
tion of  things  in  Illinois  had  brought  about  a  feeling  of 

"Gage  to  Haldimand,  May  5,  1773,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I., 
vol.  128. 

45  Ibid. 

46  "  A  Civil  Establishment  at  the  Ilinois  has  been  very  long  an  object 
of  consideration;   and  as  I  have  comprehended  the  matter,  the  only 
obstacle  towards  the  completion  of  it,  has  been  the  Difficulty  of  form- 
ing a  Government  of  small  Expence,  and  suitable  to  their  Situation  and 
Circumstances."     Gage  to  Dartmouth,  May  5,  1773,  ibid.     "There 
have  been  Thoughts  of  a  Civil  Government  at  the  Ilinois,  if  the  people 
should  desire  one  in  such  a  Form  as  His  Majesty  could  grant  and  suit- 
able to  their  situation."     Gage  to   Haldimand,  June  3,   1773,  Can. 
Arch.,  series  B,  vol.  5,  p.  142. 

i7  "  I  have  .  .  .  wrote  to  the  Commanding  Officer  at  Kaskaskies  to 
desire  he  would  confer  again  with  the  people  of  the  Ilinois  on  the  sub- 
ject of  a  Civil  Government,  and  endeavour  to  prevail  on  them  to  send, 
thro'  him,  some  reasonable  proposals  on  that  head  ..."  Gage  to 
Dartmouth,  April  7,  1773,  P-  R-  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  128. 
"  Captain  Lord  has  again  Orders  to  try  the  people  on  the  Subject  and 
to  prevail  on  them  to  apply  properly  through  their  Commanding  Offi- 
cer."  Gage  to  Haldimand,  June  3,  1773,  Can.  Arch.,  series  B,  vol. 
5,  p.  142.  Gage  further  says  that  he  "gave  the  Inhabitants  of  that 
Country  to  Understand  I  should  receive  no  Proposals  but  through  their 
Commander".  Gage  to  Haldimand,  January  5,  1774,  B.  M.,  Add. 
MSS.,  21,665. 


STRUGGLE  FOR  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT      159 

indifference  towards  the  whole  question.  In  a  report  to 
General  Haldimand,  the  acting  commander-in-chief  in 
1773,  Commandant  Lord  wrote  that  "The  Inhabitants 
have  given  me  no  answer  on  the  subject  of  a  Civil  Es- 
tablishment." "I  believe",  he  continued,  "the  appre- 
hension they  have  of  losing  all  the  Troops  should  the  Civil 
Government  be  fixed  makes  them  so  inactive  in  the  matter. 
The  little  money  that  circulates  now  comes  first  from  the 
Troops.  Should  they  be  recalled,  the  inhabitants  hav- 
ing no  market  for  their  Property,  would  soon  be  reduced  to 
the  most  miserable  situation  in  life."  48  There  is  no  evi- 
dence that  any  further  interest  was  taken  in  the  subject  by 
the  inhabitants  themselves. 49 

48  September  3,  1773,  Can.  Arch.,  series  B,  vol.  31,  p.  7. 

49  This  is  somewhat  contrary  to  the  current  view.     Bancroft  says  on 
this  point :   "  It  was  on  the  fourth  of  November  that  the  fathers  of  the 
Commonwealth  of  Illinois,  through  their  agent   Daniel  Bloiiin,  for- 
warded their  indignant  protest  against  the  proposed  form,  which  they 
rejected  as  oppressive  and  absurd ;  much  worse  than  any  of  the  French 
or  even  the  Spanish  Colonies;  .    .    .  '  Should  a  Government  so  evi- 
dently tyranical  be  established  ' ,  such  was  their  language  to  the  British 
minister,  '  it  could  be  of  no  long  duration;  there  would  exist  the  neces- 
sity of  its  being  abolished'."     Hist,  of  U.    S.,  ed.   1854,  VI,  472. 
Mason,  Chapters  from  III.   Hist,,   283,  and,  quite  recently,  Parrish, 
Historic  III.,  have  enlarged  upon  the  story.     They  declare  that,  in  a 
public  meeting,  and  under  the  leadership  of  Daniel  Bloiiin,  a  protest 
was  drawn  up  by  the  inhabitants  against  the  plan  proposed  by  the  gov- 
ernment, and  forwarded  to  Lord  Dartmouth.     This  is  a  myth,  pure  and 
simple.     Bancroft's  original  statement  is  based  upon  a  letter  written  to 
Dartmouth  by  Bloiiin,  dated  at  New  York,  November  4,  1773.     From 
this  letter  Bancroft  extracted  the  detached  phrases  regarding  the  op- 
pression, etc.,  of  the  plan  quoted  in  his  statement.     A  careful  reading 
of  the  whole  letter  indicates,  however,  that  the  sentiments  expressed 
are  those  of  Bloiiin  and  Clazon,  and  not  of  the  people  of  Illinois.     For 
this  letter  see  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  128.     There  is  abso- 
lutely no  record  to  indicate  that  any  public  meeting  was  held  in  1 773 
to  consider  a  government.     Proof  of  the  apathy  of  the  people  has 
just  been  cited.     Nor  is  there  any  evidence  that  Bloiiin  was  in   Illi- 
nois between  1771  and  1774.     For  evidence  that  he  was  in  New  York 
or  the  East  during  this  time,  see   Bloiiin  to  Dartmouth,  October  6, 
1773,  B.  T.  Papers  (Hist.  Soc.  Pa.),  vol.  XXXI,  and  Haldimand  to 
Lord,  October  13,  1773,  B.  M.,  Add.  MSS.,  21,693. 


160  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

Another  wave  of  land  speculation 60  similar  to  that  of 
1766  occurred  in  1773,  when  we  find  the  organization  of 
the  Illinois  Land  Company,  composed  chiefly  of  Philadel- 
phians,  and  in  1775,  upon  the  formation  of  the  Wabash 
Land  Company.  William  Murray ,  representing  the  Illinois 
Company,  purchased  from  the  Indians  in  1773  one  large 
tract  of  land  on  the  Illinois  River,  and  another  south  of 
Kaskaskia  on  the  Ohio,  both  of  which  the  company  pur- 
posed to  colonize.  Later  the  Wabash  Company,  through 
its  agent  Viviat,  an  Illinois  Frenchman,  purchased  tracts 
on  the  Wabash  River.  These  purchases  were  in  direct 
contravention  of  the  proclamation  of  1763,  and,  although 
the  purchasers  exhibited  the  opinions  of  Lord  Camden  and 
Chancellor  York  to  the  effect  that  such  transactions  were 
valid, 51  the  government  through  General  Gage  annulled  the 

50  The  following  extract  from  a  letter  of  Gage  is  of  interest  in  this 
connection:   "There  have  many  reports  spread  through  America  con- 
cerning New  Governments  on  the  Ohio  and  the  Mississippi,  and  a  Book 
called  Political  Essays  has  been  lately  published  in  London,  wherein 
the  Author  treats  largely  of  the  Colonies.     He  finds  great  fault  with 
England  for  Colonizing  in  the  Manner  she  has  done  in  the  Northern 
Provinces,  and  blames  the  Ministers  for  not  endeavouring  to  remedy 
past  Errors,  by  opening  new  Tracts  of  fertile  Lands  to  the  Westward, 
to  tempt  the  Northern  People  to  move  thither;   and  talks  of  the  great 
advantage  to  be  obtained  by  establishing  new  Governments  .    .    .  He 
advances  many  things  as  Facts,  which  we  all  know  to  be   absolute 
Falsehoods."     Letter   to    Haldimand,   May  18,   1772,   B.    M.,  Add. 
MSS.,  21,693.     Gage  refers  doubtless  to  Political  Essays  concerning 
the  Present  State  of  the  British  Empire,  etc.     Under  section  IV,  "  De- 
fects in  the  Establishment  of  the  Colonies  and  the  means  of  Remedying 
them  ",  he  treats  of  the  desirability  of  settlements  on  the  Mississippi 
and  Ohio.     He  criticises  severely  the  proclamation  of  1763  restricting 
settlements  east  of  the  Alleghany  Mountains.     James  Adair,  another 
contemporary  writer,  in  an  elaborate  argument,  censures  the  policy  of 
the  English  Government  in  refusing  to  found  colonies  and  governments 
in  the  West,  on  the  Ohio  and   Mississippi  rivers,  where  the  surplus 
population  of  England  and  the  colonies  might  go,  History  of  the  Amer- 
ican Indian,  454-460. 

51  Gage  to  Haldimand,  February  2,  1774,  Can.  Arch.,  series  B,  vol. 
5,  p.  214;   Lord  to  Gage,  July  3,  1773,  B.  M.,  Add.  MSS.,  21,687. 
For  the  opinion  of  York  see  B.  M.,  Add.  MSS.,  21,687. 


STRUGGLE  FOR  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT      161 

grants.52     This  ended  the  successive  attempts  to  create  an 
independent  colony  in  the  Illinois  country. 

In  1774  came  the  opportunity  to  make  a  final  disposition 
of  the  Illinois  French.  During  the  period  under  consid- 
eration events  had  so  shaped  themselves  in  the  neighboring 
colony  of  Canada  that  the  ministry  was  under  the  necessity 
of  reorganizing  the  government  of  that  province.  The 
proclamation  of  1763  had  extended  English  law  to  Canada 
with  the  result  that  the  French  inhabitants  were  subjected 
to  many  hardships.  Their  grievances  were  now  to  be  taken 
into  consideration  by  the  government,  and  as  the  solution 
of  the  western  and  Canadian  problems  seemed  to  be 
closely  connected,  the  two  questions  were  taken  up  at  the 
same  time.  General  Gage  was  summoned  home  in  1773, 
and  was  directed  to  bring  with  him  every  paper  relating  to 
the  West  which  might  tend  to  "  explain  as  well  the  causes 
as  the  effects  "  of  the  abuses  and  disorders  in  Illinois.  w 

54  For  an  account  of  the  Illinois  and  Wabash  land  companies,  see  a 
pamphlet  published  in  Philadelphia  in  1 796  entitled  Account  of  the 
Proceedings  of  the  Illinois  and  Ouabache  Land  Companies.  See  also 
memorials  in  American  State  Papers,  Public  Lands,  vols.  I  and  II. 
The  history  of  their  operations  may  be  traced  in  the  following  letters : 
Lord  to  Haldimand,  July  3,  1773,  Can.  Arch.,  series  B,  vol.  70,  p. 
132;  Lord  to  Gage,  July  3,  1773,  Johnson  MSS.,  vol.  XXV,  no.  211; 
Johnson  to  Haldimand,  September  30,  1773,  B.  M.,  Haldimand 
Papers,  Corr.  with  Sir  William  Johnson,  1759-1774;  Haldimand  to 
Dartmouth,  October  6,  1773,  Can.  Arch.,  series  B,  vol.  35;  Haldi- 
mand to  Lord,  October  10,  1773,  ibid.,  p.  no;  Haldimand  to  John- 
son, October  20,  1773,  B.M., Haldimand  Papers,  Corr.  with  Sir  William 
Johnson,  1759-1774;  Dartmouth  to  Haldimand,  November  I,  1773, 
Can.  Arch.,  series  B,  vol.  35,  p.  52;  Haldimand  to  Dartmouth,  No- 
vember 13,  1773,  B.  M.,  Haldimand  Papers,  Corr.  with  Lord  Dart- 
mouth, 1773-1775;  Dartmouth  to  Haldimand,  December  i,  1773, 
Johnson  MSS.,  vol.  XXV,  no.  221;  Haldimand  to  Dartmouth,  Janu- 
ary 5,  1774,  Can.  Arch.,  series  B,  vol.  35,  p.  62;  Dartmouth  to  Haldi- 
mand, January  8,  1774,  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  128;  Haldi- 
mand to  Lord,  March  9,  1774,  Can.  Arch.,  series  B,  vol.  33,  p.  233; 
Haldimand  to  Gage,  March  4,  1774,  B.  M.,  Add.  MSS.,  21,655. 

58  Dartmouth  to  Gage,  March  3,  1773,  B.  M.,  Add.  MSS.,  21,697. 
It  was  also  decided  to  send  an  agent  into  the  Illinois  country  for  the 


1 62  THE  ILLINOIS  COUNTRY,  1763-1774 

As  a  result  of  his  recommendations  and  of  the  investigations 
of  the  ministry  the  Quebec  Act  of  1774  was  enacted,54  ac- 
cording to  the  provisions  of  which  the  entire  Northwest  was 
included  within  the  limits  of  the  province  of  Quebec.55  In 
the  instructions  issued  to  the  governor  of  Canada  in  January, 
1 7 75, M  we  find  provisions  for  the  government  of  Illinois. 
It  was  to  be  governed  from  Quebec,  and  a  lieutenant-gov- 
ernor or  superintendent  was  to  reside  at  Kaskaskia , 5T  at 
which  place  also  a  lower  court  of  King's  Bench  was  to  be 
established  to  cooperate  with  the  superior  courts  of  the 
province  in  general.58 

These  arrangements  were  not  put  into  execution,  how- 
ever, because  of  the  outbreak  of  the  American  Revolution, 
which  absorbed  the  whole  attention  of  both  the  home  gov- 
ernment and  Canada.  As  early  as  January,  1774,  the  de- 
tachment of  troops  had  been  ordered  to  leave  Fort  Gage, 
and  the  allowance  to  the  commanding  officer  discontinued.59 

purpose  of  making  an  exact  report  of  every  phase  of  the  western  prob- 
lem, including  Indian  affairs  and  the  temper  of  the  French  inhabitants. 
A  Major  Hay  was  selected  for  the  mission.  Dartmouth  to  Haldimand, 
October  14,  1773,  P-  R-  O-»  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  128;  Haldimand  to 
Dartmouth,  March  2,  1774,  B.  M.,  Add.  MSS.,  21,695;  Haldimand 
to  Johnson,  April  7,  1774,  ibid.,  21,670;  same  to  same,  April  29, 
1774,  ibid.;  letter  to  Robert  Basset,  April  30,  1774,  Mich.  Pioneer 
and  Hist.  Colls.,  X,  260;  Johnson  to  Haldimand,  May  5,  1774,  Can. 
Arch.,  series  B,  vol.  X,  p.  165;  Guy  Johnson  to  Haldimand,  August  20, 
1774,  Can.  Arch.,  series  B,  vol.  X,  p.  178.  The  results  of  the  mission, 
however,  do  not  appear. 

54 Text  of  the  Act  in  Can.  Const.  Docs.,  //J9-/79/,  401-405.  This 
volume  also  contains  the  various  draughts  of  the  bill.  For  the  best 
discussion  of  the  act,  see  Coffin,  Province  of  Quebec  and  the  Early  Am. 
Rev.,  275-562. 

M  Can.  Const.  Docs.,  ifjg-rfqi,  402. 

68  Can.  Arch.  Report,  1904,  229-242. 

w  Ibid.,  233.  **  Ibia.,  242. 

"Barrington  to  Haldimand,  February  2,  1774,  B.  M.,  Add.  MSS., 
21,695.  ^ee  a'so  "  List  of  Officers  who  have  commanded  at  the  Out- 
posts from  25th  December  1772  to  24th  December  1773  inclusive", 
ibid.,  21,696.  Lord  and  a  few  of  the  soldiers  did  not,  however,  leave 


STRUGGLE  FOR  CIVIL  GOVERNMENJ       163 

From  this  time  on  little  or  no  attention  was  paid  to  western 
affairs.  Illinois  was  left  in  the  hands  of  a  Frenchman 
named  Roche blave,  who  acted  as  agent  for  the  government 
from  1776  to  1778. *°  His  best  efforts  to  save  the  country 
to  Great  Britain  were,  however,  in  vain.  As  the  govern- 
ment had  ignored  his  call  for  troops,  an  American  army 
under  George  Rogers  Clark  easily  effected  the  conquest  of 
Illinois,  and  the  whole  Northwest  in  1778. 

until  the  spring  of  1776.  There  is  evidence  of  this  in  A  Narrative 
of  the  Transactions,  Imprisonment  and  Sufferings  of  John  Connolly ', 
an  American  Loyalist,  19-29,  and  in  Carleton  to  Lord,  July  19,  1776, 
B.  M.,  Add.  MSS.,  21,699. 

^Alvord,  ///.  Hist.  Colls.,  II,  xxxi-xliii. 


DOCUMENTARY  APPENDIX. 

I.    MEMORIAL  OF  THE  MISSISSIPPI  COMPANY   TO   THE  KING 

AND  RESOLUTIONS  FOR  THE  GOVERNMENT  OF 

THE  COMPANY.1 

AT  a  meeting  of  the  Mississippi  Company  at  Belleview  Sept. 
9th,  1763. 

Present, 

Thomas  Ludwell  Lee  Presly  Thornton 

George  Washington  James  Douglas 

Francis  Lightfoot  Lee  William  Fitzhugh,  Sen. 

Thomas  Bullitt  Henry  Fitzhugh 

Richard  Henry  Lee  Francis  Thornton 

Anthony  Stewart  George  Stimson 

William  Lee  William  Booth 

John  Aug.  Washington  William  Brent 

Charles  Diggs  Robert  Brent 

A  Memorial  to  his  Majesty  being  read,  some  amendments 
made  thereto,  the  same  was  agreed  to  and  is  as  followeth  : 
To  the  King's  most  Excellent  Majesty. 
The  Humble  Memorial  of  Inhabitants  of  Great  Britain,  Vir- 
ginia, Maryland,  etc. 

May  it  please  Your  Majesty, 

The  Memorialists  considering  it  the  duty  of  all  good  subjects 
to  improve  to  the  utmost  of  their  power  the  blessings  of  peace 
and  reflecting  how  this  improvement  may  be  best  obtained  by 
the  exertions  of  their  abilities  and  the  applications  of  their  for- 
tunes ;  have  proposed  with  the  approbation  and  under  the  pro- 
Chatham  MSS.,  vol.  97,  Public  Record  Office,  London. 


166  DOCUMENTARY  APPENDIX 

tection  of  Your  Majesty  to  settle  as  speedily  and  as  effectually 
as  possible,  some  part  of  that  vast  country  on  the  Mississippi 
and  its  waters  ;  now  unquestionably  your  Majesty's  territory  by 
the  late  Treaty  of  Peace. 

The  Increase  of  the  people,  the  extension  of  trade  and  the 
enlargement  of  the  revenue  are  with  certainty  to  be  expected, 
where  the  fertility  of  the  soil,  and  mildness  of  the  Climate  in- 
vite emigrants  (provided  they  can  obtain  Lands  on  easy  terms) 
to  settle  and  cultivate  commodities  most  wanted  by  Great 
Britain  and  which  will  bear  the  charges  of  a  tedious  naviga- 
tion, by  the  high  prices  usually  given  for  them, — such  as  Hemp, 
Flax,  Silk,  Wine,  Potash,  Cochineal,  Indigo,  Iron,  etc.,  by 
which  means  the  Mother  Country  will  be  supplied  with  many 
necessary  materials,  that  are  now  purchased  of  foreigners  at  a 
very  great  expense.  Especially  naval  stores  so  essential  to  the 
very  being  of  a  commercial  state,  that  it  must  index  great  re- 
straints, in  all  transactions  with  those  powers  by  whom  they 
are  furnished.  Whilst  the  inhabitants  of  the  infant  settlements, 
finding  their  labor  most  profitably  bestowed  upon  Agriculture 
will  not  think  of  interfering  with  the  Mother  Country  in  Manu- 
factures but  afford  a  never  failing  demand  for  them. 

To  effect  these  good  purposes  the  memorialists  have  formed 
themselves  into  a  Company  by  the  name  of  the  Mississippi 
Company,  that  by  a  Union  of  their  Councils  and  fortunes  they 
may  in  the  most  prudent  and  proper  manner  explore  and  as 
quickly  as  possible  settle  that  part  of  the  Country  hereafter 
mentioned,  if  your  Majesty  shall  be  graciously  pleased  to  in- 
dulge them  with  these  conditions. 

ist  That  Your  Majesty  grant  unto  your  memorialists,  being 
fifty  in  number  by  name  of  the  Mississippi  Company  two  mil- 
lion five  hundred  thousand  acres  of  Land  on  the  Mississippi 
and  its  waters,  to  be  laid  off  within  the  following  bounds  begin- 
ning upon  the  East  side  of  the  River  Mississippi  one  hundred 
and  twenty  miles  above  or  to  the  northward  of  the  confluence 
of  the  River  Ohio  therewith.  Thence  by  a  line  to  strike  the 
River  Wabash  or  St.  Ireon  eighty  miles  above  its  junction  with 


DOCUMENTARY  APPENDIX  167 

the  River  Ohio.  Thence  southerly  crossing  the  River  Ohio 
one  hundred  and  twenty  miles  above  the  union  of  the  Ohio  and 
Wabash,  and  abutting  on  the  main  branch  of  the  River  Chero- 
kee or  Tennessee  one  hundred  and  fifty  miles  above  the  junc- 
tion of  Cherokee  River  with  Ohio  and  proceeding  thence 
Westerly  in  a  line  to  strike  the  River  Mississippi  ninety  miles 
below  the  union  of  Ohio  with  that  River  ;  thence  upon  the  said 
River  to  the  beginning. 

2ly  That  your  memorialists  shall  have  liberty  of  holding 
their  lands  twelve  or  any  other  larger  number  of  years  that 
your  Majesty  shall  approve  (after  a  survey  thereof  shall  have 
been  made  and  returned)  clear  of  all  composition  money  quit 
rent  or  taxes.  And  that  your  memorialists  within  twelve 
years  shall  be  obliged  to  seat  the  said  lands  with  two  hundred 
families,  at  the  least,  if  not  interrupted  by  the  Savages,  or  any 
Foreign  Enemy,  and  to  return  the  Survey  thereof  to  such  office 
as  your  Majesty  shall  be  pleased  to  direct,  otherwise  to  forfeit 
the  grant,  so  to  be  made  by  your  Majesty,  and  the  said  lands 
liable  to  the  entries  of  any  other  Adventurers. 

The  Memorialists  humbly  hope  that  Your  Majesty  may  be 
graciously  moved  to  grant  these  favorable  terms  in  considera- 
tion of  the  heavy  charges  and  great  expences  they  must  neces- 
sarily incur,  in  the  exploring,  surveying  and  settling  this  dis- 
tant Country  and  the  great  risk  they  will  run  of  losing  their 
property,  from  their  contiguity  to  the  French  and  their  prox- 
imity to  the  Indian  Nations.  And  because  it  has  been  proved 
by  experience,  that  large  tracts  of  land  taken  up  by  Companies 
may  be  retailed  by  them  to  Individuals,  much  cheaper  than 
they  can  obtain  them  immediately  from  the  Crown,  occasioned 
by  the  charges  arising  from  the  solicitation  of  patents,  making 
surveys  and  other  contingent  expences.  Besides  the  difficulty 
the  poorer  sort  are  under  from  their  ignorance  of  the  proper 
methods  to  be  taken  in  solliciting  patents  as  well  as  their  in- 
ability to  advance  ready  money  for  such  purposes.  Whereas 
from  Companies  they  have  only  to  receive  their  Conveyances, 
without  any  previous  Expence,  credit  given  them  to  make  their 


1 68  DOCUMENTARY  APPENDIX 

payments,   when  by  their  industry  they  become  enabled  to 
do  so. 

And  though  attempts  to  settle  in  this  way  have  sometimes 
miscarried,  in  the  hands  of  Gentlemen  possessed  of  afluent 
fortunes,  because  of  that  indolence  and  inattention  frequently 
attending  persons  in  such  circumstances  especially  when  not 
excited  by  the  near  prospect  of  immediate  and  considerable 
profit.  The  greater  part  of  the  present  Adventurers  being  of 
good  families  and  considerable  influence  in  the  Counties  where 
they  live,  though  possessed  of  but  moderate  fortunes,  are  in- 
duced from  the  goodness  of  the  Soil  and  Climate  of  the  Coun- 
try upon  the  Mississippi  to  believe  that  by  a  proper  application 
of  their  money  and  industry,  they  will  acquire  as  well  a  present 
advantage  as  a  provision  for  their  prosperity  ;  which  being 
joined  by  the  pleasing  prospect  of  public  utility  ;  all  their  affairs 
will  be  conducted  with  that  spirited  assiduity,  which  in  matters 
of  danger  and  difficulty,  can  only  insure  success.  The  truth 
of  this  is  evident  from  a  determined  resolution  in  several  of 
the  members  to  be  themselves  among  the  first  settlers. 

The  Memorialists  most  humbly  submit  it  to  Your  Majestic' s 
great  Wisdom  whether  the  remote  situation  of  this  Country  from 
the  Colonies  already  settled  may  not  render  it  expedient  to  pro- 
tect the  Infant  Settlement  from  the  insults  of  the  Savages. 
Which  protection  might  effectually  be  obtained,  if  Your  Majesty 
were  graciously  pleased  to  order  a  small  Fort  to  be  garrisoned 
at  the  confluence  of  Cherokee  River  with  Ohio  ;  as  it  would 
interpose  between  the  first  Settlers,  and  the  Chicazaw  and 
Chattaes  Indians,  the  only  powerful  Nations  in  that  quarter. 
Which  is  probable,  might  by  a  small  garrison,  be  influenced 
to  continue  in  their  ancient  amity  with  British  Subjects.  Es- 
pecially the  former  of  these  Nations,  whose  faith  and  friendship 
have  ever  remained  firm  and  unaltered.  At  the  same  time  a 
garrison  placed  at  the  junction  of  Ohio  and  Mississippi  Rivers, 
if  they  should  be  disposed  to  encroach  on  the  Dominions  of 
Your  Majesty,  in  that  part  where  they  appear  to  have  been  in- 
clinable to  take  footing  on  account  of  its  communication  with 


DOCUMENTAR  Y  APPENDIX  1 69 

the  northwestern  lakes  ;  and  the  conveniences  wherewith  in 
time  of  War  they  can  harass  and  disturb  Your  Majestic' s  Colo- 
nies already  settled. 

It  is  humbly  conceived  from  the  mild  and  friendly  disposition 
of  the  Southern  Indians  that  the  Settlement  of  the  Country  pro- 
posed, may  be  obtained  more  safely  and  speedily  by  beginning 
such  settlem1-  in  their  Neighborhood  than  further  North,  where 
the  fierce  and  warlike  Irocois,  with  their  six  Nations  ever  ac- 
customed to  War  and  shedding  of  blood,  would  certainly  ob- 
struct, if  not  absolutely  prevent  the  Settlement  for  many  years 
to  come,  while  the  southern  Settlem'-  begun  in  safety  and  ad- 
vancing in  security  will  soon  become  much  too  powerful  to  be 
prevented  in  their  progress,  by  the  enmity  of  the  Northern  or 
any  other  Indians.  At  the  same  time  that  by  conducting  a 
trade  useful  to  the  Indians  on  the  borders  of  Mississippi  they 
will  effectually  prevent  the  success  of  that  cruel  policy,  which 
has  ever  directed  the  French  even  in  time  of  peace,  to  prevail 
with  the  Indians  their  Neighbors  to  lay  waste  the  frontiers  of 
Your  Majestic' s  Colonies  thereby  to  prevent  their  increase. 

In  consideration  of  the  reasons  here  afforded,  the  Memorial- 
ists most  humbly  submit  this  their  Memorial  to  Your  Majesty's 
Wisdom. 

Resolved  that  Wm  Lee,  Esq.,  be  appointed  Treasurer  to  the 
Company  and  that  he  give  Bond  with  Security,  in  the  Penalty 
of  One  thousand  pounds  current  money  to  the  Company  for 
the  just  and  faithful  performance  of  his  Office  of  Treasurer. 

Resolved  that  the  annual  general  meeting  of  the  Com- 
pany shall  be  held  at  Stafford  Court  House  in  Virginia  on  the 
first  day  of  October  if  the  same  should  not  happen  on  Sunday  ; 
if  it  should  then  the  meeting  to  be  on  the  day  following. 

Resolved  that  the  following  members  to  wit,  Honble 
Presly  Thornton,  Thomas  Ludwell  Lee,  Richard  Henry  Lee, 
Francis  Lightfoot  Lee,  Henry  Fitzhugh,  John  Augustine  Wash- 
ington, William  Booth,  William  Brodenbrough,  Richard  Parker 
Esquire,  and  Doctor  William  Flood  be  appointed  a  Committee 
of  the  Company  who  are  to  meet  at  Westmoreland  Court  House 


I7o  DOCUMENTARY  APPENDIX 

in  Virginia  twice  a  year  (that  is  to  say)  on  the  loth  day  of  May 
and  the  loth  day  of  November,  if  not  on  Sunday;  if  it  shod< 
happen  to  be  on  Sunday,  then  the  meeting  to  be  on  the  next 
day  and  likewise  they  are  to  meet  as  much  oftener  as  the  affairs 
of  the  Company  require  ;  and  the  said  Committee  to  have  such 
power  as  they,  by  the  general  Articles  of  Agreement,  are  vested 
with. 

Resolved  that  the  said  Committee  do  with  all  possible  dili- 
gence transmit  the  Memorial  after  the  same  shall  be  fairly 
transcribed,  to  Thos.  Gumming  Esqr.  of  London  to  be  by  him 
laid  before  the  King;  that  they  invite  Mr.  Gumming  to  be  one 
of  the  Company,  and  desire  him  to  procure  subscribers  to  the 
Scheme,  not  exceeding  nine  of  such  influence  and  fortune  as 
may  be  likely  to  promote  its  success.  That  the  Committee  re- 
quest Mr.  Gumming,  that  if  he  sho'd  not  choose  to  be  one  of 
the  Company  or  to  sollicit  their  Grant,  to  put  all  their  affairs 
into  the  hands  of  an  Agent  or  Sollicitor  as  in  his  opinion  may 
be  most  likely  by  his  Interest  and  Diligence  to  Succeed;  That 
Mr.  Gumming  on  finding  the  Ministry  disposed  to  comply  with 
the  Company's  Memorial  give  the  most  early  intelligence 
thereof  to  the  Committee,  in  order  that  a  meeting  of  the  Com- 
pany may  be  had  to  raise  such  a  Sum  of  money  as  may  be 
sufficient  to  obtain  Letters  Patent  from  the  Crown,  that  in  the 
meantime  he  proceed  as  far  as  the  nature  of  the  thing  will 
admit  in  issuing  out  the  said  Letters  Patent ;  That  he  inform 
the  Committee,  the  expence  that  will  accrue  on  the  said  issuing 
of  such  Letters  Patent. 

Resolved  that  the  Sum  of  One  Hundred  and  Twenty-two 
pounds  Sterling  be  forthwith  paid  by  the  Company  into  the 
hands  of  the  Treasurer  to  be  by  him  disposed  of  according  to 
the  direction  of  the  Committee.  Each  member  being  allowed 
to  pay  his  proportion  in  so  much  current  money  of  Virginia  as 
will  amount  to  his  Sterling  proportion. 

Resolved  that  the  Committee  inform  Mr.  Gumming  that  if 
he  chooses  to  undertake  the  Sollicitation  of  their  affairs  they 
present  him  with  an  hundred  Guineas  as  an  earnest  of  their 
present  and  future  good-will. 


DOCUMENTARY  APPENDIX  1 7 1 

Resolved  that  altho'  the  Original  Articles  of  Agreement,  do 
declare  that  a  general  meeting  of  the  Company  shall  be  had 
at  one  particular  time  and  place  annually  ;  yet  if  it  shall  happen 
that  the  circumstances  of  affairs  render  it  necessary  that  a  gen- 
eral meeting  should  be  more  frequently  held,  the  Committee 
shall  have  power  to  summon  the  said  general  meeting  (by  ad- 
vertising it  twice  in  the  Virginia  and  Maryland  Gazette)  as 
often  as  shall  be  requisite,  and  a  majority  of  such  general 
meeting  as  meet  shall  have  full  and  ample  power  to  determine 
all  matters  relative  to  the  Company  and  their  determinations 
to  be  binding  on  the  whole  Company  and  that  it  shall  be  a 
never  failing  rule  of  the  Company,  whenever  a  contrariety  of 
opinion  shall  arise  concerning  the  Sum  of  money  to  be  raised 
and  different  Sums  shall  be  proposed,  that  the  least  Sum  men- 
tioned shall  first  be  put  to  question,  and  rise  from  thence  to 
the  next  greatest  Sum,  untill  the  highest  Sum  proposed  has 
been  put,  and  that  which  has  the  largest  number  of  votes 
shall  be  the  Sum  to  be  raised  by  the  Company. 

Resolved  that  if  the  Company  shall  be  so  fortunate  as  to 
succeed  in  their  Sollicitations,  and  a  grant  be  obtained  for  the 
Lands  they  request  in  that  Case  when  it  shall  be  determined 
by  a  general  meeting  that  a  division  of  the  Lands  shall  be 
made,  such  a  division,  shall  for  the  sake  of  fairness  and  im- 
partiality, be  effected  in  the  following  manner:  The  whole 
Quantity  of  Land  shall  be  divided  into  as  many  equal  lots  or 
parcels,  as  there  shall  be  members  or  shares  in  the  Company, 
and  the  lots  so  divided  shall  be  numbered,  and  as  many  cor- 
respondent numbers  being  prepared,  each  member  or  a  sub- 
stitute by  him  appointed  (provided  he  make  such  appointment 
in  twelve  months  after  the  Division  shall  be  agreed  on,  and 
notice  thereof  conveyed  to  him,  by  the  Treasurer  for  the  time 
being,  but  if  he  fail  to  make  such  appointment  then  the  ma- 
jority of  the  general  meeting  shall  appoint  a  person  to  act  for 
such  absentee)  shall  draw  from  among  such  corresponding 
numbers,  and  whatever  number  is  drawn  by  each  shall  take 
such  lot  of  Land,  the  number  of  which  agrees  with  the  num- 
bers drawn. 


172  DOCUMENTARY  APPENDIX 

II.    "REASONS  FOR  ESTABLISHING  A  BRITISH  COLONY   AT 
THE  ILLINOIS  WITH  SOME  PROPOSALS  FOR  CARRY- 
ING THE  SAME   INTO   IMMEDIATE 

EXECUTION.  ' '  1 

THE  Country  of  the  Illinois  on  the  Mississippi,  is  generally 
allowed  to  be  the  most  fertile  and  pleasant  Part  of  all  the 
Western  Territory  now  in  the  Possession  of  the  English  in 
North  America. 

The  French  Canadians  have  long  called  it,  The  Terrestrial 
Paradice. 

It  appears  from  the  best  Intelligence,  that  about  Four  Hun- 
dred French  Families  are  now  settled  in  that  Country  ;  and 
that,  in  all  Probability  it  would  have  been  the  most  consider- 
able French  Settlement  in  North  America,  had  not  the  Inhabi- 
tants throughout  Canada,  and  Louisiana,  particularly  those 
living  among,  or  near  Indians,  been  Subjected  to  Military 
Command,  liable  to  be  taken  from  their  Farms  even  in  the 
Time  of  Harvest,  to  go  upon  distant  Expeditions,  and  to  have 
the  Product  of  their  Labour  seized  for  the  Use  of  the  Army. 

It  has  been  the  mistaken  Policy  of  the  French  to  aim  at  es- 
tablishing Military  instead  of  Commercial,  Colonies  in  North 
America.  Their  Views  were  to  expel  the  English  from  all 
their  Settlements  on  the  Sea  Coast,  and  thereby  to  engross  the 
whole  of  the  Continent. 

In  this,  however,  they  have,  thro'  Providence,  been  happily 
disappointed. 

But  had  the  French  contented  themselves  with  settling  and 
improving  the  Country  they  actually  possessed,  they  would 
have  rivalled  the  English  in  their  most  valuable  American 
Commodities,  and  have  increased  the  Commerce  of  France, 
and  consequently  the  French  Power,  to  a  very  great  Degree. 
For  instance, 

1  In  Sir  William  Johnson's  letter  of  July  10,  1766,  Board  of  Trade 
Papers  (Hist.  Soc.  Pa.),  Plantations  General,  vols.  27  and  28,  1765- 
1767;  Franklin  Papers  (Am.  Phil.  Soc.),  LVIII,  4. 


DOCUMENTARY  APPENDIX  1 73 

The  Lands  in  Louisiana  produce  Tobacco  of  a  much  superior 
Quality  to  any  raised  in  either  Maryland  or  Virginia,  and  Rice 
and  Indigo  equal  to  the  best  of  Carolina. 

Those  Articles,  with  Skins  and  Furs,  are  the  principal  Com- 
modities which  North  America  has  hitherto  produced  to  any 
great  Extent,  for  European  Consumption. 

But  were  the  Lands  on  the  Mississippi  well  settled,  we  should 
be  enabled  to  supply  all  Europe  with  those  Commodities,  and 
at  a  far  cheaper  Rate  than  they  could  be  afforded  from  any 
other  Country. 

But  what  is  of  the  utmost  Consequence  to  Great  Britain,  no 
Country  in  the  known  World  is  better  adapted  than  this  for  the 
Raising  Hemp,  Flax  and  Silk. 

Of  the  Former,  indeed,  there  are  immense  Quantities  grow- 
ing Spontaneously  on  the  large  extensive  Plains  of  Louisiana, 
And  this  wild  sort  appears  from  some  late  Experiments,  to  have 
a  firmer  Texture  than  that  commonly  cultivated.  The  Country 
likewise  abounds  with  Mulberry  Trees  and  both  native  and  for- 
eign Silk  Worms  thrive  extremely  well  there. 

Great  Britain  might  also  be  furnished  from  thence  with  Cot- 
ton, Copper,  Iron,  Pot  Ash,  Wine,  Salt  petre,  a  great  variety  of 
valuable  Medicinal  Drugs  and  other  Articles,  which,  with  those 
mentioned  before,  make  the  great  Ballance  of  Trade  against 
the  Nation,  and  drain  it  of  its  Treasure. 

From  the  Illinois  we  might  likewise  carry  on  a  more  exten- 
sive and  advantageous  Fur-Trade,  with  the  numerous  Indian 
Nations  which  reside  near  the  Lakes  and  the  different  Branches 
of  the  Mississippi,  than  was  ever  known  since  the  first  Settle- 
ment of  America; — Supplying  them  with  British  Manufactures  to 
a  vast  Amount. 

Nor  will  the  French  be  able  to  rival  us  in  this  Trade,  as  we 
can  transport  our  Goods  through  Pennsylvania  and  Virginia  to 
that  Country  much  cheaper  than  can  be  done  from  New  Orleans 
up  the  Mississippi.  This  is  the  only  passage  the  French  have 
now  left,  and  being  all  the  Way,  against  the  Stream  is  extremely 
difficult  and  tedious.  Whereas  the  English  have  now  a  ready 


1 74  DOCUMENTAR  Y  APPENDIX 

Communication  from  Virginia  and  Pennsylvania  to  Fort  Pitt 
on  the  Ohio,  and  from  thence  have  Water  Carriage  with  the 
Stream  to  the  Mississippi,  and  when  they  have  disposed  of  their 
Goods  to  the  Indians  in  that  Country,  they  may  easily  trans- 
port the  Commodities  they  receive  in  Return  down  the  Missis- 
sippi to  Mobile,  and  from  thence  ship  them  to  England. 

For  want  of  this  Opening  thro'  the  middle  Province  of  North 
America  to  the  Mississippi,  the  French  never  had  it  in  their 
Power  to  reap  so  much  advantage  from  that  Country  as  the 
English  now  may. 

After  several  Disappointments,  and  much  Expence  and 
Trouble,  the  English  have  at  length  got  possession  of  all  the 
French  posts  on  the  East  Side  of  the  Missippi  \sic\ . 

A  Question  arises.  What  will  be  the  most  efficacious  Means 
of  supporting  these  Posts,  so  distant  from  every  British  Settle- 
ment, and  yet  so  necessary  to  maintain  the  British  Interest 
amongst  the  numerous  Indians  which  inhabit  that,  and  the  ad- 
jacent Country  ? 

It  is  answered,  That  there  is  no  Way  so  effectual  as  to  settle 
a  Colony  at  the  Illinois  under  a  good  civil  Government. 

This  Colony  being  in  one  of  the  finest  Corn  Countries  in  the 
World,  would  have  it  in  its  Power,  not  only  to  supply  the  dif- 
ferent Posts  in  the  Indian  Country,  but  the  two  Floridas  with 
provisions.  Several  of  the  French  Writers  term  it  the  Granary 
of  Louisiana,  and  mention  that  at  a  Time  when  there  happened 
to  be  a  Scarcity  at  New  Orleans,  the  French  Settlement  at  the 
Illinois,  small  as  it  then  was,  Sent  them  upwards  of  800,000 
Weight  of  Flour. 

If  we  have  not  a  Colony  on  the  Spot,  to  support  the  Posts 
We  are  now  possessed  of  in  that  Country,  the  French  who 
have  a  Fort  and  an  encreasing  Settlement  on  the  opposite 
Shore  of  the  Mississippi,  will  have  it  in  their  Power,  by  means 
of  their  Influence  with  the  Indians,  to  intercept  our  Supplies, 
interrupt  our  Trade,  and  ultimately  cut  off  all  Communication 
between  the  Illinois  and  the  present  English  Colonies. 

It  is  said,  that  many  of  the  French  in  Canada,  and  numbers 


DOCUMENTAR  Y  APPENDIX  1 7  5 

of  those  settled  on  the  East  Side  of  the  Mississippi,  near  our 
Posts,  intend  to  remove  to  the  Settlement  belonging  to  the 
French  on  the  opposite  Shore. 

Should  the  French  succeed  in  establishing  a  Colony  there 
(which  they  probably  will  as  it  is  in  so  fine  a  Country)  and  we 
have  not  another  to  Balance  it,  in  that  part  of  the  World,  the 
Consequences  may  be  very  Prejudicial  to  the  British  Interest. 

It  may  not  be  amiss  to  quote  here  the  Sentiments  of  a  late 
Writer  very  conversant  with  this  Subject.  In  speaking  of  the 
Fineness  of  the  Soil  and  climate  of  the  Country  on  each  Side 
the  Mississippi,  near  the  Illinois,  he  says  "It  is  this  that  has 
made  the  French  undergo  so  many  long  and  perilous  Voyages 
in  North  America,  upwards  of  Two  Thousand  Miles,  against 
Currents,  Cataracts,  and  boisterous  Winds  on  the  Lakes,  in 
order  to  get  this  Settlement  of  the  Illinois;  which  is  nigh  to  the 
Forks  of  the  Mississippi,  the  most  important  place  in  all  the 
inland  Parts  of  North  America,  to  which  the  French  will  sooner 
or  later  remove  from  Canada;  and  there  erect  another  Mon- 
treal, that  will  be  much  more  dangerous  and  prejudicial  to  us, 
than  ever  the  other  in  Canada  was.  They  will  here  be  in  the 
Midst  of  all  their  old  Friends  fed  Allies,  and  much  more  con- 
venient to  carry  on  a  Trade  with  them,  to  spirit  them  up 
against  the  English  etc.  than  ever  they  were  at  Montreal.  To 
this  Settlement,  where  they  likewise  are  not  without  good 
Hopes  of  finding  Mines,  the  French  will  forever  be  removing, 
as  long  as  any  of  them  are  left  in  Canada. ' ' 

The  most  likely  Way  to  prevent  these  Mischiefs,  and  to  en- 
able the  English  to  dispossess  the  French  of  the  remaining  Part 
of  Louisiana,  should  a  future  War  make  it  expedient,  will  be, 
it  is  thought,  to  establish  a  Colony  there,  agreeable  to  the  fol- 
lowing Proposals,  Viz1. 

I.  Let  the  Crown  purchase  of  the  Indians  all  their  Rights  to 
that  Tract  of  Country  lying  on  the  East  Side  of  the  River  Mis- 
sissippi, between  the  Illinois  River  and  the  River  Ohio,  and 
Fifty  Miles  back  from  the  said  River  Mississippi. 


1 7  6  DOCUMENTAR  Y  APPENDIX 

Remarks 

This  Tract  includes  Fort  Chartres,  Cahoke,  and  Kaskasqmas 
(three  considerable  French  Settlements)  and  it  is  said  from 
good  Authority,  that  the  Indians  have  expressed  an  Inclination 
to  part  with  it  to  the  English  on  very  moderate  Terms,  and 
that  they  might  easily  be  persuaded  to  sell  all  the  Lands  as  far 
back  as  the  Heads  of  the  several  small  Rivers  which  empty 
themselves  into  the  Mississippi  between  the  Illinois  and  the 
Ohio.  They  having  a  greater  Quantity  of  fine  Hunting  Country 
than  they  can  ever  have  any  use  for.  This  would  be  a  sufficient 
Tract  to  begin  a  Colony  upon,  and  having  a  natural  Boundary, 
would  be  most  preferable. 

2.  Let  a  Civil  Government  be  established  there,  agreeable 
to  the  Principles  of  an  English  Constitution. 

3.  Let  the  first  Governor  be  a  person  experienced  in  the 
Management  of  Indian  Affairs,  and  who  has  given  Proofs  of 
his  Influence  with  the  Savages. 

Remark 

This  is  a  Matter  of  the  utmost  Consequence  in  the  first  Set- 
tlement of  a  Colony  surrounded  by  Indians:  And  for  want  of  a 
due  Attention  to  it,  many  Undertakings  of  the  like  kind  have 
either  entirely  failed,  or  been  greatly  impeded. 

4.  Let  all  the  Lands  which  may  be  granted  within  the  first 
Twenty  Years  be  laid  out  in  Town  Ships,  after  the  Manner 
practiced  in  some  of  the  New  England  Colonies,  or  according 
to  the  Plan  laid  down  in  the  Historical  Account  of  the  Expedi- 
tion under  Colonel  Bouquet1,  lately  published  (quod  vide). 

Remark 

The  Advantage  of  this  Mode  of  Settling  in  a  Country  sur- 
rounded by  Savages,  who  may  One  Day  become  Enemies,  are 
too  obvious  to  need  mentioning. 

5.  Let  Grants  of  Land  in  this  Country  be  offered  to  the  Pro- 

1See  p.  119.  n.  45,  and  bibliography  for  account  of  pamphlet. 


DOCUMENTARY  APPENDIX  177 

vincial  Officers  and  soldiers  who  served  in  the  late  War  in 
America,  in  the  following  Terms, -Viz* 

100  Acres  to  every  common  Soldier. 

1 50  Acres  to  every  Corporal  and  Serjeant. 

250  Acres  to  every  Ensign. 

350  Acres  to  every  Lieutenant. 

350  Acres  to  every  Surgeon. 

350  Acres  to  every  Chaplain. 

500  Acres  to  every  Captain. 

750  Acres  to  every  Major. 

1,000  Acres  to  every  Lieut.  Collonel. 

1,200  Acres  to  every  Collonel. 

The  Soldiers,  Corporals  and  Serjeants  who  have  served  more 
Campaigns  than  one  to  have  Ten  Acres  besides  for  each  Cam- 
paign after  the  first.  The  Ensigns,  Lieutenants,  Surgeons, 
Chaplains  and  Captains  Thirty,  and  the  Majors,  Lieut.  Colo- 
nels, Fifty  Acres,  in  like  manner  Each  General  Officer  (of 
which  there  were  two  or  Three)  to  have  a  Grant  of  5,000  Acres. 
The  whole  to  be  granted  in  Fee,  and  to  be  exempt  from  Quit 
Rent  for  a  certain  Term  of  Years,  or  for,  and  during  the  natural 
Lives  of  the  said  Officers  and  Soldiers;  and  then  to  be  liable  to 
the  same  only  as  is  reserved  in  Virginia.  No  Grant  to  be  made 
to  any  Officer  or  Soldier  under  Fifty  Years  of  Age,  who  does 
not  appear  in  person  at  the  Illinois  (with  a  Certificate  from  the 
Government,  or  Commander  in  Chief  of  the  Province  in  whose 
Employ  he  was,  specifying  his  Station,  and  the  Number  of 
Campaigns  he  was  in  the  Service)  and  actually  make  a  Settle- 
ment on  the  Lands  for  which  he  shall  receive  a  Warrant  of 
Survey. — But  such  Officers  and  Soldiers  as  are  fifty  Years  of 
Age  and  upwards,  and  who  may  not  incline,  or  be  able  to  re- 
move to  the  Illinois,  should  be  allowed  either  to  dispose  of  their 
Rights  to  Grants  of  Lands  to  such  Persons  as  will  settle  them, 
or  place  Tenants  thereon,  as  may  be  most  convenient  to  them- 
selves. Provided;  That  every  Officer  and  Soldier  who  does 
not  make,  or  cause  to  be  made  a  Settlement  and  Improvement 
on  the  Lands  he  may  be  entituled  to,  within  Six  Years  after  the 


1 78  DOCUMENTARY  APPENDIX 

Arrival  of  an  English  Governor  at  the  Illinois  in  order  to  estab- 
lish a  Colony  there,  shall  forfeit  all  Right  and  Title  Thereto. 
Provided  also  that  every  Officer  of  the  Rank  of  a  Captain,  and 
upwards  shall  at  his  own  proper  Cost  and  Expence  settle  upon 
his  Grant  at  least  One  white  Protestant  Person  for  every  Hun- 
dred Acres  thereof  within  Six  Years  following  the  Date  of  his 
said  Grant — Subject  to  the  Forfeiture  of  such  Proportion  of  the 
said  Grant,  as  there  shall  be  a  Deficiency  of  that  Number  of 
Settlers. — It  would  be  proper  for  the  Crown  to  furnish  the  Sol- 
diery with  a  few  Implements  of  Husbandry  at]their  first  Arrival  at 
the  Illinois,  and  to  allow  all  Settlers  the  Use  of  the  King's  Boats 
at  Fort  Pitt,  and  other  Assistance,  to  transport  themselves  as 
far  as  the  Mississippi. 

Remark 

The  giving  Encouragement  to  these  Men,  who  are  Soldiers 
as  well  as  Farmers,  etca  to  engage  themselves  in  the  first  Set- 
tlement of  this  Country,  will  be  not  only,  Right  in  point  of 
Policy,  but  be  an  Act  of  Justice.  The  Provincial  Officers  and 
Soldiers  who  have  served  in  the  several  Campaigns  during  the 
War  in  America,  and  who  have  undergone  equal  Fatigues,  and 
run  equal  Hazards  with  the  King's  Troops,  think  it  extremely 
hard,  that  they  should  not  be  allowed,  as  well  as  the  disbanded 
Regulars,  a  Grant  of  some  of  the  Lands  in  that  immense  Tract 
of  Country,  which  they  have  assisted  in  obtaining  from  the 
Enemy,  especially  as  they  had  not  equal  Advantages  when  in 
Service;  The  Officers  not  being  entituled  to  half  Pay,  nor  the 
Men  to  Chelsea  Hospital.  They  were  generally  paid  off  and 
discharged,  as  soon  as  the  Campaign  was  over.  The  giving 
these  persons  Lands  in  Proportion  to  their  Rank,  and  the 
Number  of  Campaigns  they  have  served  will  be  likewise  a  great 
Encouragement  to  the  Colonists  to  enter  into  the  Military  Ser- 
vice on  any  future  Occasion.  And,  besides,  it  is  said,  that  at 
the  Beginning  of  the  late  War,  the  Americans  were  promised, 
or  given  to  understand,  that  such  of  them  as  engaged  in  the 
Provincial  Service,  should,  when  the  War  was  at  an  End,  have 
some  such  Gratification  in  Land  as  is  here  proposed. 


DOCUMENTAR  Y  APPENDIX  1 79 

6.  Let  all  Mines  and  Minerals  belong  to  the  Owners  of  the 
Land  in  which  they  may  be  found,  except  those  denominated 
Royal  Mines,  and  of  these  let  the  Crown  reserve  a  Fifth,  clear 
of  all  Charges. 

Remark 

This  will  encourage  People  to  be  at  the  Trouble  and  Expence 
of  searching  for  and  working  of  Mines,  but  if  the  whole  or  too 
great  a  Part  is  reserved  to  the  Crown,  they  will  want  the  neces- 
sary Inducement  to  make  Discoveries,  whereby  both  the  Crown 
and  Nation  may  be  prevented  from  receiving  many  Advantages. 

7.  Let  there  be  500  Acres  reserved  in  every  Township  for  the 
maintenance  of  a  Clergyman  of  the  Established  Church  of 
England. 

Remark 

As  it  is  the  Interest  of  every  Nation,  that  the  Religion,  it  has 
thought  proper  to  establish,  should  be  the  Religion  most  gener- 
ally prevalent  throughout  its  Dominions,  this  Matter  ought  to 
be  particularly  attended  to  in  America,  and  the  Church  be  well 
supported  there,  otherwise  Presbyterianism  will  become  the 
Established  Religion  in  that  Country.  It  is  much  to  be  regret- 
ted, that  the  Crown  did  not  reserve  in  each  of  the  Colonies, 
Lands  for  this  purpose,  at  the  Time  of  granting  their  respective 
Charters.  It  is  however  not  yet  too  late  for  the  Crown  to  cause 
such  Reservations  to  be  made  in  many  of  the  old  settled  Colo- 
nies, particularly  Nova-Scotia,  New  York,  Virginia,  North 
and  South  Carolina  and  Georgia.  Care  should  likewise  be 
taken,  in  Time,  to  make  the  like  Provision  in  our  new  Ac- 
quisitions, Canada,  and  the  Two  Floridas. 

8.  Let  the  Bounds  of  the  Colony  be  as  follows,  Viz.  From 
the  Mouth  of  the  Ouisconsin  (or  Wisconsing)  River  down  the 
Mississippi  agreeable  to  Treaty,  to  the  Forks,  or  Mouth  of  the 
Ohio.     Then  up  the  same  River  Ohio  to  the  River  Wabash, 
thence  up  the  same  River  Wabash  to  the  Portage  at  the  Head 
thereof,  Then  up  the  said  Portage  to  the  River  Miamis  and 


i8o  DOCUMENTARY  APPENDIX 

down  the  said  River  Miamis  to  Lake  Erie.  Thence  along  the 
several  Courses  of  the  said  Lake  to  Riviere  al  Ours  (or  Bear 
River)  and  up  the  said  River  to  the  Head  thereof,  and  from 
thence  in  a  straight  Line,  or  by  the  Portage  of  St.  Joseph's 
River  and  down  the  same  River  to  Lake  Michigan,  then  along 
the  several  Courses  of  the  said  Lake  on  the  South  and  West 
Side  thereof  to  the  point  of  Bay  Puans,  and  along  the  several 
Courses  on  the  East  Side  of  the  said  Bay  to  the  Mouth  of  Foxes 
River,  thence  up  to  the  Head  thereof  and  from  thence  by  a 
Portage  to  the  Head  of  Ouisconsin  River,  and  down  the  same 
to  the  Place  of  Beginning. 

Remark 

These  being  natural  Boundaries  may  be  easily  ascertained. 
Altho'  no  Person  should  be  allowed  to  settle  on  any  Lands,  but 
what  are  within  the  Bounds  purchased  by  the  Crown  of  the  In- 
dians, yet  it  will  be  highly  proper,  that  the  Civil  Jurisdiction  of 
the  Colony  should  extend  much  farther  than  will  be  probably 
purchased  for  many  years  to  come;  otherwise  loose,  evil  dis- 
posed Persons  may  straggle  into  those  Parts,  and  commit  Dis- 
orders that  may  involve  the  Colony  in  Disputes  with  the  Indians, 
and  be  attended  with  fatal  Consequences.  And  it  might  have 
good  Effects  if  a  Civil  Authority  was  likewise  established  at 
D'Etroit,  to  take  Cognizance  of  all  Misdemeanors  committed 
by  British  Subjects  upon  the  Lakes  and  Country  adjacent. 

9.  But  that  a  Colony  may  be  speedily  settled  at  the  Illinois, 
and  the  Crown  and  Nation  receive  the  Advantages  to  be  de- 
rived from  it,  without  Delay,  A  Company  of  Gentlemen  of 
Character  and  Fortune  are  ready  and  willing  to  engage,  That 
if  the  Crown  will  make  them  a  Grant,  in  Fee  of  [  ]  Hundred 
Thousand  Acres  of  Land  free  of  Quit  Rent  for  [  ]  Years  to 
be  located  in  one  or  more  Places  as  they  shall  chuse,  within 
the  Bounds  above  mentioned,  They  will  at  their  own  proper 
Cost  and  Expence,  Settle  thereon  at  least  One  white  Protestant 
Person  for  every  Hundred  Acres  within  [  ]  Years  next  fol- 
lowing the  Date  of  their  Grant;  Subject  to  the  Forfeiture  of  such 


DOCUMENTARY  APPENDIX  181 

Proportion  of  the  unsettled  part  of  the  said  Grant  as  shall  be 
equal  to  a  Deficiency  of  that  number  of  Settlers — And  the  said 
Company  will  likewise  engage  to  settle  at  least  2,000  of  the  said 
Persons  on  the  Lands  aforesaid  within  [  ]  Years  next  after 
the  Date  of  the  said  Grant,  or  the  Arrival  of  a  Governor  in  the 
said  Colony:  unless  an  Indian  War  should  happen  to  put  it  out 
of  their  Power. 

The  Crown  need  not  be  put  to  much  Expence  to  procure  the 
Settlement  of  this  advantageous  Colony.  The  Principal  Charges 
will  be  a  Salary  to  the  Governor,  and  some  other  Officers  of 
Government  for  a  few  Years,  when  the  Colonists  will  be  en- 
abled to  support  their  own  Civil  Establishment. 

And  if  there  were  two  or  three  Companies  of  light  Infantry, 
and  of  light  Horse  were  raised  and  disciplined  in  the  manner, 
and  on  the  Terms,  recommended  by  Coll.  Bouquet  in  the 
Publication  before  mentioned,  They  would  not  only  be  an  effec- 
tual Security  for  the  Colony  in  its  Infancy,  but  also  contribute 
greatly  to  the  Protection  of  the  Frontiers  of  the  Old  settled  Col- 
onies from  the  Incursions  of  the  Indians,  and  they  would  like- 
wise be  of  infinite  Service  in  case  of  a  future  War  with  the 
French.  This  Corps  might  be  raised  and  disciplined  within  a 
Year,  or  two  at  farthest,  when  the  Regiment  now  posted  there 
might  be  employed  upon  other  Service  more  suitable  to  such 
Troops,  unless  indeed  it  should  be  thought  necessary  to  keep  a 
few  of  them  to  do  Garrison  Duty  for  some  Time  longer.  The 
Officers  who  served  during  the  War  in  America  in  the  Corps 
of  light  Infantry  and  Rangers  would  be  the  most  proper  to  raise 
and  discipline  the  Foot  Companies;  but  for  the  light  Horse  it  will 
be  necessary  that  Officers  should  be  sent  from  England,  who 
have  been  accustomed  to  that  Service.  Horses  of  a  good  Sort 
are  to  be  had  in  great  plenty  at  the  Illinois.  If  a  Company,  or 
two  of  this  kind  of  Soldiery  were  also  kept  at  each  of  our  prin- 
cipal Posts  in  the  Indian  Country,  it  would  be  the  most  likely 
Means  of  deterring  the  Indians  from  going  to  War  with  us  in 
future. 


i8a  DOCUMENTARY  APPENDIX 

3.  LORD  HILLSBOROUGH  TO  GENERAL  GAGE.  ' 
Most  Secret. 

WHITEHALL,  Jan.  2d,  1771. 

Nothing  has  happened  since  my  last  Letter  to  You  to  streng- 
then our  hopes  that  the  Public  Peace  might  be  preserved;  on 
the  contrary,  there  is  but  too  much  reason  to  apprehend  that 
the  matter  in  Negotiation  with  the  Court  of  Spain  will  have  its 
Issue  in  a  speedy  war,  the  Success  of  which  will  depend  upon 
the  most  vigorous  Exertions  of  every  Strength  this  Kingdom  is 
able  to  put  forth. 

In  this  situation  it  has  become  necessary  to  give  full  Scope 
to  the  Consideration  not  only  of  those  measures  which  it  may 
be  proper  to  pursue  for  the  Defence  and  Security  of  His  Ma- 
jesty's Possessions,  but  also  in  what  places  the  Enemy  may  be 
annoyed  and  attacked  with  the  greatest  Advantage  and  best 
hope  of  Success,  and  also  what  Steps  may  be  advisable,  pre- 
paratory to  any  Enterprize  that  may  be  undertaken. 

The  Result  of  this  Deliberation,  so  far  as  it  regards  offensive 
Operations  in  America,  has  been  the  adopting  a  Proposition  to 
begin  those  operations  by  an  attack  upon  New  Orleans. 

The  Advantage  that  would  attend  the  entire  Possession  of 
the  Mississippi,  both  in  point  of  Commerce  and  of  Security  to 
the  rest  of  the  King's  Possessions  in  North  America,  have  been 
fully  expiated  upon  and  explained  in  the  Course  of  Our  Cor- 
respondence and  those  Advantages  combined  with  the  general 
Intelligence  of  the  small  Number  of  Troops  left  in  Louisiana 
by  General  O'Reilly,  the  Indisposition  or  rather  aversion  of  the 
French  Inhabitants  to  the  Spanish  Government,  the  great  Ex- 
tent and  Weakness  of  the  Defenses  of  the  town  of  New  Orleans, 
and  the  supposed  Practicability  of  approaching  it  either  on  the 
side  of  West  Florida  or  By  the  Rivers  Ohio  and  Mississippi, 
have  been  the  grounds  on  which  this  Proposition  has  been 
adopted.  The  Practicability,  however,  of  such  an  undertaking, 

1  P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  127. 


DOCUMENTARY  APPENDIX  183 

as  well  as  the  Quantum  of  Force  to  be  employed,  and  the 
manner  in  which  the  attack  is  to  be  made,  must  entirely  de- 
pend upon  your  own  Judgement,  forming  that  Judgement  on  a 
variety  of  Facts  and  Circumstances  that  cannot  be  known  here; 
and  therefore  it  is  the  King' s  Pleasure  that  you  do  give  the  ful- 
lest Consideration  to  this  Proposition,  and  if  you  see  no  reason- 
able Objections  to  it  that  you  do  take  such  preparatory  Steps 
as  shall  be  necessary  for  carrying  it  into  immediate  Execution, 
so  soon  as  you  shall  receive  the  King's  Orders  to  commence 
Hostilities,  in  Case  His  Majesty  should  be  driven  to  that  ne- 
cessity;— An  Event  that  will  probably  be  decided  upon  in  a 
few  days. 

It  is  the  King's  present  intention,  from  the  reliance  His 
Majesty  has  upon  your  Ability  and  Zeal  for  the  Honor  of  His 
Arms,  that  you  should  command  upon  this  Expedition  in  Person: 
and  as  the  Assistance  of  a  Naval  Force  may  be  necessary  on 
the  side  of  the  Gulph  of  Mexico  to  prevent  any  Succours  being 
thrown  in,  either  before  or  after  the  Operations  are  commenced, 
the  Commander-in-Chief  of  the  Squadron  at  Jamacia  will  be 
ordered  to  co-operate  with  you  in  this  important  Service,  and 
to  afford  every  aid  the  nature  of  his  command  will  admit  of. 

The  King's  Servants  having  submitted  to  His  Majesty  their 
Opinion,  that,  as  well  for  carrying  into  Execution  the  proposed 
Attack  upon  New  Orleans,  as  for  answering  any  other  purposes 
which  Government  may  have  in  view  in  the  Prosecution  of  a 
War,  it  may  be  advisable  that  a  large  body  of  Troops  should 
be  collected  together  in  one  convenient  Spot;  I  am  therefore 
commanded  to  recommend  this  Measure  for  your  Considera- 
tion; but  at  the  same  time  I  must  not  omit  to  mention  to  you 
that  the  force  in  the  Province  of  Quebec  should  not  be  dimin- 
ished, nor  any  reduction  made  of  that  in  Newfoundland  or  in 
West  Florida,  nor  that  the  Posts  upon  the  Lakes  should  be 
left  in  a  State  of  Insecurity. 


1 84  DOCUMENTARY  APPENDIX 

4.  GENERAL  GAGE  TO  LORD  HILLSBOROUGH.  l 

NEW  YORK,  April  2d,  1771. 

Your  Lordship's  Most  Secret  of  the  2d  of  January  has  been 
received.  .  .  . 

From  all  accounts  that  have  been  received  hitherto,  of  the 
State  and  Condition  of  Louisiana,  an  Attack  upon  that  Province 
is  very  practicable,  and  of  the  different  means  of  approaching 
New  Orleans  the  River  Mississippi  is  judged  the  most  advan- 
tageous; tho'  feigned  attacks  might  at  the  same  time  be  of  ser- 
vice, on  the  side  of  the  Ohio,  and  West  Florida. 

Your  Lordships  Letter  was  not  received  till  the  2$th  ult.  the 
Packet  having  been  about  ten  weeks  from  Falmouth,  a  Passage 
unfortunately  long  at  this  Juncture;  but  the  greatest  Diligence 
will  be  used  to  assemble  a  Body  of  Troops.  And  in  due  Con- 
sideration of  every  circumstance  requisite  in  the  fitting  out  an 
Expedition,  I  know  no  place  in  North  America  so  proper  as  the 
Port  of  New  York.  I  therefore  propose,  till  camp  Equipage  is 
provided,  or  that  the  weather  permits  to  encamp  the  Troops, 
to  post  them  as  near  to  New  York  as  I  shall  be  able. 

Orders  have  been  transmitted  for  the  64th  and  6$th  Regi- 
ments to  embark  at  Halifax  for  Boston;  from  whence  they  will 
March  into  some  of  the  Colonys  the  most  contiguous  to  this, 
till  further  Orders;  .  .  . 

1P.  R.  O.,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  vol.  127. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY. 


In  the  descriptive  notes  which  follow  comment  has  been  confined  to 
the  value  of  the  sources  and  other  works  for  the  special  field  of  the  essay. 

GUIDES  AND   BIBLIOGRAPHIES. 

Alvord,  C.  W.,  "  Eighteenth  Century  French  Records  in  the  Archives 
of  Illinois  ",  printed  in  Annual  Report  of  (he  American  Historical  As- 
sociation for  1905,  vol.  I.  Washington,  1906. — Valuable. 

Alvord,  C.  W.,  Illinois  in  the  Eighteenth  Century,  printed  as  Bulle- 
tin of  the  Illinois  State  Historical  Library,  vol.  I,  no.  I.  Springfield, 
111.,  1905. — This  is  a  report  on  the  documents  in  the  St.  Clair  County 
Court  House  at  Belleville,  111. — An  illuminating  study. 

Andrews,  Charles  M. ,  "Materials  in  British  Archives  for  American 
Colonial  History",  printed  in  American  Historical  Review,  vol.  X, 
pp.  325-349. 

Andrews,  Charles  M.,  and  Frances  G.  Davenport,  Guide  to  the 
Manuscript  Materials  for  the  History  of  the  United  States  to  f?Sj,  in 
the  British  Museum,  in  Minor  London  Archives,  and  in  the  Libraries 
of  Oxford  and  Cambridge.  Carnegie  Institution  of  Washington,  Pub- 
lication No.  90.  Washington,  1908. — A  work  of  first  importance 
which  appeared  too  late  for  use  in  the  present  investigation. 

Canadian  Archive  Reports, — This  well-known  series  is  especially 
valuable  on  account  of  the  extended  inventories  and  calendars  it  con- 
tains of  documents  in  English  and  French  archives.  Because  of  the 
careless  editing  of  the  earlier  volumes  they  must  be  used  with  caution. 
Of  most  value  for  this  study  have  been  the  volumes  for  1884-1889, 
containing  lists  of  the  Bouquet  and  Haldimand  papers,  and  for  1905, 
I,  containing  abstracts  of  documents  in  the  Ministry  of  Colonies  in 
Paris. 

Channing,  Edward,  and  Albert  Bushnell  Hart,  Guide  to  the  Study 
of  American  History.  Boston,  1896. 

Day,  R.  E. ,  comp.,  Calendar  of  the  Sir  William  Johnson  Manu- 
scripts in  the  New  York  State  Library.  Albany,  1909. — Valuable. 


1 86  BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Hays,  I.  Minis,  comp.,  Calendar  of  the  Papers  of  Benjamin  Franklin 
in  the  Library  of  the  American  Philosophical  Society,  5  vols.  Phila- 
delphia, 1908. 

Lamed,  J.  N.,  ed.,  The  Literature  of  American  History  :  a  Bibli- 
ography, published  for  the  American  Library  Association.  Boston, 
1902. 

Lincoln,  Charles  H.,  Calendar  of  Johnson  MSS.  in  the  American 
Antiquarian  Society  Library.  Worcester,  Mass.,  1906. 

New  York  Public  Library,  Manuscript  Collections  in  the  New  York 
Public  Library  (Deposited  in  the  Lenox  Building),  printed  in  the 
Bulletin  of  the  New  York  Public  Library  for  July,  1901. — A  valuable 
descriptive  list.  Of  much  service  in  consulting  the  Bancroft  Collection. 

New  York  State  Library,  Calendar  of  Council  Minutes,  1668-1783, 
printed  as  Bulletin  58,  History  6,  March,  1902. 

Reports  of  the  Royal  Historical  Manuscripts  Commission. — Es- 
pecially the  Fifth  Report,  Appendix  I,  on  the  Shelburne  papers,  and 
the  Fourteenth  Report,  Appendix  X,  on  the  Dartmouth  papers. 

Sabin,  Joseph,  A  Dictionary  of  Books  relating  to  America,  19  vols. 
New  York,  1868-1892. 

Thwaites,  Reuben  G. ,  ed.,  Descriptive  List  of  Manuscript  Collec- 
tions of  the  State  Historical  Society  of  Wisconsin.  Together  with  Re- 
ports on  Other  Collections  of  Manuscript  Material  for  American  His- 
tory in  Adjacent  States.  Madison,  1906. 

Thwaites,  Reuben  G.,  Benjamin  F.  Shambaugh,  and  Franklin  L. 
Riley,  "  Report  of  Committee  on  Methods  of  Organization  and  Work 
on  the  Part  of  the  State  and  Local  Historical  Societies",  printed  in 
Annual  Report  of  the  American  Historical  Association  for  1905,  vol.  I. 
— Contains  notes  on  the  collections  of  source  material  in  the  libraries  of 
the  various  historical  societies. 

Van  Tyne,  C.  H.,  and  W.  G.  Leland,  Guide  to  the  Archives  of  the 
Government  of  the  United  States  in  Washington,  second  edition,  Car- 
negie Institution  of  Washington,  Publication  No.  92.  Washington, 
1907. 

Winsor,  Justin,  Narrative  and  Critical  History  of  America,  8  vols. 
Boston,  1889. — Of  great  value  for  accounts  of  sources,  especially  those 
in  vol.  V. 

MANUSCRIPT  SOURCES. 

Public  Record  Office,  London. — A  large  part  of  the  present  essay  has 
been  based  upon  documents  found  in  the  Colonial  Office  records,  under 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  187 

the  title  of  "  Military  Correspondence,  Series  America  and  West 
Indies."  The  greater  portion  of  the  correspondence  between  the 
ministry  and  the  British  agents  in  America  having  charge  of  the  West 
is  found  in  this  collection.  It  cannot  be  said,  however,  that  the  orig- 
inal document  is  always  to  be  found  here;  very  often  a  copy  or  a  mere 
extract  is  all  we  have.  In  the  Colonial  Office  records  are  also  found 
the  "Board  of  Trade  Papers",  which  contain  a  few  valuable  letters. 
The  Home  Office  records  and  the  War  Office  records  likewise  contain 
a  few  documents  of  importance.  In  a  miscellaneous  collection  of  the 
Earl  of  Chatham's  papers,  on  deposit  in  the  Public  Record  Office,  is  a 
bundle  of  papers  having  an  important  bearing  on  the  West.  The  refer- 
ences in  the  foot-notes  are  to  the  old  classification.  The  re-classifica- 
tion of  the  Public  Record  Office  was  commenced  in  1908,  and  is  not 
yet  (1910)  complete.  The  Guide  to  the  Manuscript  Materials  for  the 
History  of  the  United  States  to  1783  in  the  Public  Record  Office,  which 
is  being  prepared  by  Professor  C.  M.  Andrews  for  the  Carnegie  Insti- 
tution of  Washington,  will  contain  a  key  enabling  references  to  the 
former  classification  to  be  found  in  the  new  classification. 

British  Museum,  London. — The  Bouquet  Papers,  in  17  volumes 
(Add.  MSS.,  21,631-21,600),  and  the  Haldimand  Papers,  in  4231 
volumes  (Add.  MSS.,  21,661-21,692),  are  the  important  sources  in 
this  depository.  The  Bouquet  Papers  contain  a  few  documents  relat- 
ing to  the  early  history  of  the  period,  with  especial  reference  to  early 
Indian  troubles.  The  Haldimand  Papers  are  indispensable  for  the 
latter  half  of  the  period.  The  collection  is  composed  of  letters  which 
passed  between  Haldimand  and  the  home  officials,  his  correspondence 
with  Gage  and  the  officers  in  the  West,  besides  many  other  letters 
which  came  into  his  possession.  The  correspondence  throws  consider- 
able light  upon  the  political  status  of  the  Illinois  French.  Transcripts 
of  the  Bouquet  and  Haldimand  collections  are  in  the  Canadian  Archives 
at  Ottawa,  and  have  been  calendared  by  Douglas  Brymner  in  the  Re- 
ports on  Canadian  Archives,  for  1884-1889. 

Privy  Council  Office,  London. — This  collection  contains  a  few  im- 
portant documents  bearing  on  western  colonization. 

Lansdowne  House  Manuscripts,  London. — The  papers  of  the  Earl 
of  Shelburne,  found  here,  are  of  great  value  in  the  study  of  western 
trade  conditions. 

New  York  State  Library,  Albany. — Here  are  found  26  volumes  of 
Sir  William  Johnson's  papers,  a  very  valuable  collection,  dealing 
largely  with  Indian  affairs,  which  came  under  Johnson's  supervision. 


1 88  BIBLIOGRAPHY 

There  are  also  important  documents  relating  to  western  trade  and 
colonization. 

Lenox  Library,  New  York  City. — This  contains  the  manuscript  col- 
lection of  George  Bancroft,  which  includes  a  large  number  of  tran- 
scripts from  the  "America  and  West  Indies"  series  in  the  Public 
Record  Office.  His  copies  are  generally  accurate :  capitalization  and 
punctuation,  however,  cannot  always  be  depended  upon.  There  are 
also  in  this  collection  transcripts  from  the  Earl  of  Shelburne's  papers 
from  the  Lansdowne  House  manuscripts.  In  the  selections  made  to 
illustrate  western  history,  however,  Bancroft  evidently  omitted  some  of 
the  more  important  papers. 

Library  of  the  Historical  Society  of  Pennsylvania,  Philadelphia. — 
Considerable  use  was  made  of  a  number  of  volumes  of  transcripts  of 
the  Board  of  Trade  papers,  Plantations  General,  of  which  the  library 
contains  1 80  volumes.  A  comparison  of  a  few  papers  with  the  orig- 
inals in  the  Public  Record  Office  indicates  that  the  transcripts  were 
accurately  made.  There  are  also  a  number  of  minor  collections  of 
original  manuscripts  which  are  indispensable  to  students  of  western 
history.  Among  these  are  the  Gratz-Croghan  Papers,  vol.  I,  the  Ohio 
Company  Papers,  vols.  I  and  II,  and  the  Etting  Papers,  vol.  III. 
These  collections  deal  largely  with  western  trade  conditions  and  land 
speculation.  There  are  also  a  number  of  miscellaneous  manuscripts, 
e.  g.,  the  original  "  Journal  "  written  by  Captain  Harry  Gordon  on  his 
trip  down  the  Ohio  River  in  1 766,  and  a  diary  kept  by  John  Jennings 
in  Illinois  during  the  years  1766-1768. 

American  Philosophical  Society,  Philadelphia. — Here  are  many 
valuable  letters  to  Benjamin  Franklin  on  the  West,  which  are  not 
found  elsewhere. 

Pennsylvania  State  Library,  Harrisburg,  Pa. — In  the  Division  of 
Public  Records  are  most  of  the  account  books  of  the  firm  of  Baynton, 
Wharton  and  Morgan,  and  an  important  collection  of  George  Morgan's 
papers. 

Library  of  Congress. — One  volume  of  the  correspondence  of  Secre- 
tary Henry  S.  Conway,  which  yielded  a  few  scattering  letters  on 
western  trade  conditions  and  Indian  affairs. 

Library  of  the  American  Antiquarian  Society,  Worcester,  Mass. — 
Here  were  found  a  few  original  letters  of  Sir  William  Johnson  having 
an  important  bearing  on  western  colonization. 

Library  of  the  Massachusetts  Historical  Society,  Boston. — Use  was 
made  of  the  Francis  Parkman  Collection  of  transcripts,  which  relate  to 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  189 

the  early  part  of  the  period.  Lack  of  proper  references  to  the  location 
of  the  originals,  as  well  as  evidence  that  the  copies  were  not  always 
made  with  absolute  accuracy,  render  the  use  of  this  collection  rather 
difficult. 

Harvard  College  Library. — The  chief  sources  found  here  were  a  vol- 
ume of  General  Gage's  letters,  which  shed  considerable  light  on  Indian 
affairs  in  the  West,  and  the  Sparks  Collection  of  transcripts  from  the 
Public  Record  Office  and  the  British  Museum.  Little  use  was  made  of 
the  Sparks  Collection,  however,  the  originals  being  consulted  in  prefer- 
ence, although  in  a  few  cases  where  the  latter  could  not  be  found  the 
transcripts  had  to  be  relied  upon. 

Canadian  Archives,  Ottawa,  Canada. — Transcripts  of  the  Bouquet 
and  Haldimand  Papers  are  to  be  found  here,  as  well  as  of  a  large  num- 
ber of  Colonial  Office  records. 

Kaskaskia  Records,  British  Period. — These  papers  contain  a  few 
important  sources  bearing  on  the  political  events  in  Illinois.  The  most 
important  document  is  the  court  record,  which  consists  of  256  pages. 
The  collection  is  at  present  in  the  library  of  the  University  of  Illinois, 
but  belongs  to  the  county  of  St.  Clair,  Illinois. 

Cahokia  Records,  Court  House,  Belleville,  111. — This  collection  con- 
tains a  few  papers  throwing  light  on  the  local  government  in  Illinois 
during  the  British  period. 

Miscellaneous. — Among  the  documents  belonging  to  private  indi- 
viduals the  most  important  is  the  letter-book  kept  by  Colonel  George 
Morgan,  1766-1768,  which  is  in  the  possession  of  Mr.  A.  S.  M. 
Morgan,  of  Pittsburg.  There  are  also  important  Morgan  letters  in  the 
possession  of  Mrs.  Maria  P.  Woodbridge,  of  Marietta,  Ohio,  Mrs.  E. 
S.  Thacher,  of  Nordhoff.Cal.,  Mrs.  H.  C.  More,  of  Gaviota,  CaL.and 
Mrs.  T.  C.  Smith,  of  Santa  Barbara,  Cal. 

PRINTED   SOURCES. 

American  State  Papers,  Public  Lands,  vols.  I-III.  Washington, 
1832. — Necessary  for  study  of  western  land  schemes. 

Canadian  Constitutional  Development  shown  by  Selected  Speeches  and 
Despatches,  edited  by  H.  E.  Egerton  and  W.  L.  Grant.  London,  1907. 
— Important  contribution. 

Chalmers,  George,  A  Collection  of  Treaties  bet-ween  Great  Britain 
and  other  Powers.  London,  1790. 

Chicago  Historical  Society  Collections,  vol.  IV.  Chicago,  1890. — 
Important  miscellaneous  documents,  the  originals  of  which  cannot  be 
traced. 


1 90 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 


Documents  illustrative  of  the  Canadian  Constitution,  edited  by 
William  Houston.  Toronto,  1891. 

Documents  relating  to  the  Colonial  History  of  the  State  of  New 
York,  edited  by  E.  B.  O'Callaghan,  15  vols.  Albany,  1856.— Im- 
portant for  study  of  Indian  affairs  and  western  colonization.  Volumes 
entitled  "  Paris  Documents  "  must  be  used  with  care. 

Documents  relating  to  the  Constitutional  History  of  Canada,  1757— 
1791,  selected  and  edited  by  Adam  Shortt  and  Arthur  G.  Doughty. 
Ottawa,  1907. — Indispensable  to  the  student  of  the  proclamation  of 
1 763  and  the  Quebec  Act. 

"  Documents  relating  to  the  Occupation  of  the  Illinois  Country  by 
the  British  Army  ",  edited  by  Clarence  E.  Carter.  Printed  in  Trans- 
actions of  the  Illinois  State  Historical  Society  for  1907.  Springfield, 
1908. 

Franklin,  Benjamin,  Complete  Works,  edited  by  John  Bigelow,  10 
vols.  New  York,  1887-1889. — Necessary  for  study  of  western  coloni- 
zation. 

Franklin,  Benjamin,  Life  and  Writings,  edited  by  A.  H.  Smythe, 
10  vols.  New  York,  1905-1907. — Contains  some  documents  on  the 
West  not  printed  in  the  Bigelow  edition. 

Franklin,  Benjamin,  Works,  edited  by  Jared  Sparks,  10  vols. 
Boston,  1837-1844. 

Grenville  Papers,  being  the  correspondence  of  Richard  and  George 
Grenville,  their  friends  and  contemporaries,  edited  with  notes  by 
William  James  Smith,  4  vols.  London,  1852. 

Illinois  Historical  Collections,  vol.  I.  Springfield,  1903. — Docu- 
ments chosen  arbitrarily.  Not  complete. 

Michigan  Pioneer  and  Historical  Collections,  vols.  19,  20.  Lansing, 
1891,  1892. — Contain  selections  from  the  Haldimand  Papers.  Arrange- 
ment and  editing  poor.  Uncritical  copies  taken  from  uncritical  copies. 

New  York  Historical  Society  Collections,  9  vols.  New  York,  1811- 
1859;  Publication  Fund  series,  18  vols.  New  York,  1868-1881. — 
Important  for  study  of  western  colonies. 

Parliamentary  History  of  England,  from  the  Earliest  Period  to  the 
Year  1813,  edited  by  T.  C.  Hansard,  vol.  XVII.  London,  1813.— 
Very  useful. 

Report  on  Canadian  Archives,  1904,  edited  by  Arthur  Doughty, 
Ottawa. — Contains  important  documents.  See  also  above  under 
Guides  and  Bibliographies. 

Rockingham,  Memoirs  of  the  Marquis  of,  and  his  contemporaries  ; 
with  original  documents,  2  vols.  London,  1852. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  191 

Stiles,  Henry  R.,  Affairs  at  Fort  Chartres,  1768-1781.  Albany, 
1864. — Includes  a  few  important  letters.  The  same  are  also  found  in 
the  Historical  Magazine,  vol.  VIII,  no.  8. 

Thwaites,  Reuben  Gold,  ed.,  The  Jesuit  delations  and  Allied  Docu- 
ments, vols.  LXX  and  LXXI.  Cleveland,  1900-1901. — Contain  a  few 
documents  of  importance  for  present  study.  Notes  not  all  trustworthy. 

Thwaites,  Reuben  Gold,  ed.,  Early  Western  Travels,  1748-1846, 
vols.  I  and  XXVII.  Cleveland,  1904  and  1906. — Croghan's  "  Journals  " 
and  Flagg's  "The  Far  West"  are  the  most  important  documents. 
Notes  to  be  used  with  care. 

Washington,  George,  Writings,  edited  by  W.  C.  Ford,  14  vols. 
New  York  and  London,  1889-1893. 

Wisconsin  Historical  Collections,  vol.  XVIII.  Madison,  1908. — 
This  volume  contains  documents  of  considerable  value  for  the  British 
period. 

CONTEMPORARY  BOOKS  AND  PAMPHLETS. 

Account  of  the  Proceedings  of  the  Illinois  and  Ouabache  Land  Com- 
panies. Philadelphia,  1796. — Invaluable. 

Adair,  James,  The  History  of  the  American  Indians  ;  Particularly 
those  Nations  adjoining  to  the  Mississippi,  East  and  West  Florida, 
Georgia,  South  and  North  Carolina,  and  Virginia.  London,  1775. 
— Valuable  for  contemporary  criticism  of  western  policy  of  Great  Britain. 

Annual  Register,  or  a  View  of  the  History,  Politics,  and  Literature 
for  the  Year  1763,  also  for  1774.  London,  1776. — Supposed  to  have 
been  written  by  Edmund  Burke.  Important  source. 

Blackstone,  William,  Commentaries  on  the  Laws  of  England  (Coolty 
edition).  Chicago,  1899. 

Bossu,  M.,  Travels  tJiroughout  that  Part  of  North  America  called 
Louisiana.  Translated  from  the  French  by  J.  R.  Forster.  London, 
1771. — Excellent  view  of  the  French  in  the  Mississippi  Valley  prior  to 
1763. 

Considerations  on  the  Agreement  of  the  Lords  Commissioners  of  His 
Majesty's  Treasury,  with  the  Honourable  J^homas  Walpole  and  the 
Associates  for  Lands  upon  the  River  Ohio  in  North  America,  in  a 
Letter  to  a  Member  of  Parliament.  London,  1 774. — Supposed  by  W.  C. 
Ford  (Bibliography  of  Franklin),  to  have  been  written  by  Franklin. 
Contains  important  statements  on  western  colonization. 

Expediency  of  securing  our  American  Colonies  by  Settling  the 
Country  adjoining  the  River  Mississippi,  Considered.  Edinburgh,  1 763 . 
— Of  great  importance. 


192 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 


Historical  Account  of  the  Expedition  against  the  Ohio  Indians  1764. 
— Attributed  by  Charles  Whittelsey  to  Thomas  Hutchins,  and  by  Jus- 
tin Winsor  to  Dr.  William  Smith  of  Philadelphia.  In  the  Library  of 
Congress  is  a  letter  by  Smith  asserting  his  own  authorship  of  the  book. 
The  work  is  now  available  in  the  Ohio  Valley  Historical  Series. 

Hunt,  William,  The  Justice  and  Policy  of  the  late  Act  of  Parliament 
for  making  more  Effectual  Provision  for  the  Government  of  the  Prov- 
ince of  Quebec,  Asserted  and  Proved,  London,  1774. — Invaluable  for 
view  on  the  legal  position  of  the  West. 

Hutchins,  Thomas,  A  7*opographical  Description  of  Virginia,  Penn- 
sylvania, Maryland,  and  North  Carolina.  Reprinted  from  the  orig- 
inal edition  of  1778.  Edited  by  F.  C.  Hicks.  Cleveland,  1904. — An 
excellent  account  of  conditions  in  British  Illinois. 

Invitation  Serieuse  des  Habitants  des  Illinois,  by  "  Un  Habitant  des 
Kaskaskias."  Philadelphia,  1772.  Reprinted  by  Club  for  Colonial 
Reprints,  vol.  IV,  with  introduction  and  notes  by  C.  W.  Alvord  and 
C.  E.  Carter.  Providence,  1908. 

Narrative  of  the  Transactions,  Imprisonment  and  Sufferings  of 
John  Connolly,  an  American  Loyalist.  London,  1783.  Reprinted 
by  C.  L.  Woodward.  New  York,  1889. 

Pittman,  Philip,  The  Present  State  of  the  European  Settlements  on 
the  Mississippi.  London,  1770. — Written  by  an  English  officer  who 
did  not  thoroughly  understand  conditions  in  Illinois  either  in  the 
French  or  British  periods.  Has  been  trusted  too  much.  Most  avail- 
able in  edition  of  F.  H.  Hodder.  Cleveland,  1906. 

Plain  Facts.  Philadelphia,  1787. — According  to  Sabin,  this  pamph- 
let was  written  by  Benjamin  Franklin  or  A.  Benezet.  According  to 
W.  C.  Ford,  it  was  written  by  neither  of  these,  but  by  Samuel  Whar- 
ton.  Many  later  writers  have  copied  from  this  work. 

Political  Essays  concerning  the  Present  State  of  the  British  Empire  ; 
Particularly  respecting :  (/)  Natural  Advantages  and  Disadvantages. 
(//)  Constitutions.  (Ill)  Agriculture.  (IV)  Manufactures.  ( V") 
Colonies,  and  (VI}  Commerce.  London,  1772. — Attributed  by  Sabin 
to  Dr.  John  Campbell.  This  is  probably  a  wrong  inference.  Contains 
a  contemporary  criticism  of  the  western  policy  of  Great  Britain. 

Pownall,  Thomas,  The  Administration  of  the  Colonies.  London, 
1 768. — Valuable  for  view  of  an  English  official  relative  to  the  merits  of 
the  French  and  English  claims  in  the  West  prior  to  1 763  and  to  the 
relations  of  the  two  nations  with  the  Indians. 

Pownall,  Thomas,  A  Topographical  Description  of  the  English  Col- 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 


193 


oiits.  London,  1776. — Contains  the  earliest  printed  copy  of  Gordon's 
Journal  down  the  Ohio  in  1766. 

Pratz,  Le  Page  du,  Histoii  e  de  la  Louisiane,  3  vols.  Paris,  1758. — 
Good  treatment  of  French  conditions  in  Illinois  prior  to  1763  by  a 
French  traveler. 

Volney,  C.  F.,  View  of  the  Climate  and  Soil  of  the  United  States. 
Translated  from  the  French.  London,  1814. — Excellent  account  of  the 
character  of  the  French  in  the  Mississippi  Valley  towards  the  close  of 
the  eighteenth  century. 

CONTEMPORARY  NEWSPAPERS. 

There  is  in  general  little  to  be  found  in  the  newspapers  relating  to 
the  West  during  the  British  period.  Some  stray  bits  of  information, 
however,  are  gleaned  from  the  following  newspapers,  found  in  the 
libraries  of  the  Pennsylvania  Historical  Society  and  the  American 
Antiquarian  Society  : 

J^ennsylvania   Chronicle  and  Universal  Advertiser,  3  vols.     1768- 

1774. 

Pennrtlvania  Gazette,  34  vols.     Philadelphia,  1728-1789. 

Pennsylvania  Journal,  13  vols.     Philadelphia,  1751-1788. 

Pennsylvania  Packet  and  General  Advertiser,  9  vols.  Philadelphia, 
1772-1784. 

GENERAL  HISTORIES  AND  BIOGRAPHIES. 

Bancroft,  George,  Historv  of  the  United  States  from  the  Discovery 
of  the  American  Continent,  10  vols.  Boston,  1834-1874. — For  this 
essay,  the  early  edition,  containing  references  to  sources,  was  used. 
The  ponions  of  the  author's  last  revision  which  relate  to  the  West, 
differ  in  no  particular  from  those  of  the  f.rst  edition.  Bancroft  had 
access  to  more  material  than  any  other  writer,  but  his  interpretations 
cannot  be  depended  upon.  Serious  errors  which  have  found  their  way 
into  most  of  the  western  histories  are  traceable  directly  to  this  work. 

Draper,  L.  C.,  "  Life  of  Boone  ",  5  vols.  MS.  in  Draper  Collection, 
State  Historical  Society  of  Wisconsin. 

Fitzmaurice,  Lord  Edmund,  fife  of  William,  Earl  of  Shelburne,  3 
vols.  London,  1875. — Necessary  for  understanding  of  bhelburne's 
position  in  England.  Perspective  very  poor. 

Franklin,  Benjamin,  7 he  Life  of  Benjamin  Franklin,  ivritten  by 
himself.  Edited  by  John  Bigelow,  3  vols.  Philadelphia,  1899. — Con- 
tains one  valuable  document.  Otherwise  of  little  use  for  present  study. 


194 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 


Howard,  George  E.,  An  Introduction  to  the  Local  Constitutional 
History  of  the  United  Mates.  J.  H.  U.  Studies.  Baltimore,  1889. — 
No  understanding  of  local  institutions  in  British  Illinois. 

Hunt,  William,  and  Reginald  L.  Poole,  ed.,  Political  History  of 
England.  12  vols.  New  York,  1906. — Vol.  X  is  of  use  on  account  of 
tabks  giving  ministerial  changes. 

Kingsford,  William,  History  of  Canada,  10  vols.  Toronto,  1887— 
i8co. — In  general  a  very  sane  piece  of  work,  although  the  author  is 
prejudiced  against  the  French. 

Parkman,  Francis,  Conspiracy  of  Pontiac  and  Ihe  Indian  War  after 
the  Conquest  of  Canada.  New  library  edition,  z  vols.  Boston,  1903. — 
Invaluable  but  lacks  sympathy  for  the  French. 

Parkman,  Francis,  La  Salle  and  the  Disco-very  of  the  Great  West. 
Boston,  1903. 

Parkman,  Francis,  Montcalm  and  Wolfe,  2  vols.     Boston,  1903. 

Perkins,  James  B.,  France  under  Louis  XV,  2  vols.    Boston,  1897. 

Sabme,  Lorenzo,  Loyalists  of  the  American  Revolution,  2  vols. 
Boston,  1864. 

Shea,  John  Gilmary,  Life  of  the  Most  Rev.  John  Carroll,  embracing 
the  History  of  the  Catholic  Church  in  the  United  States,  1763-1875. 
New  York,  1888. — Sound,  but  carelessly  constructed.  Practically  the 
only  tiust worthy  account  of  the  Catholic  Church  in  the  West. 

Spaiks,  Jartd,  Life  of  (.harles  Lee.  In  Library  of  American  Biog- 
raphy, vol.  XVIII.  Boston,  1846. 

btone,  WilLam  L.,  1 he  Life  and  Times  of  Sir  William  Johnson, 
2  vtls.  Albany,  1865.— Disappointing  wiih  respect  to  the  West  in 
which  Johnson  was  greatly  interested.  Ihe  author  had  a  large  amount 
of  material,  but  failed  to  master  it. 

Winsor,  Justin,  ed  ,  Narrative  and  Critical  History  of  America,  8 
vols.  Boston  and  New  York,  1889. — Chapter  on  "The  West"  by 
Poole  in  vol.  VI  covers  the  British  period,  but  is  practically  worthless 
so  far  as  interpretation  is  concerned.  The  editorial  notes  are,  how- 
ever, very  valuable.  The  chapter  on  "The  Mississippi  Valley"  in  vol. 
V,  by  A.  McF.  Davis,  covering  the  period  prior  to  1763,  is  of  more 
value.  The  bibliographical  notes  scattered  throughout  the  volumes  are 
indispensable. 

SPECIAL  AND  SECTIONAL  TREATISES. 

Adams,  Herbert  B.,  Maryland's  Influence  upon  the  Land  Cessions 
to  the  United  States.  J.  H.  U.  Studies.  Baltimore,  1885. — An  un- 
critical study. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 


195 


Aider),  George  H.,  Nrw  Governments  West  of  the  Allfg'iany  Moun- 
tains before  ij8o.  Bulletin  of  University  of  Wisconsin,  II,  Madison, 
1899. — Good.  He  has  confined  himself  almost  entirely  to  printed 
sources,  but  has  used  them  carefully.  Interpretations  sound. 

Alvord,  Clarence  W.,  "Genesis  of  the  Proclamation  of  1763",  in 
Michigan  Pioneer  and  Historical  Collections,  vol.  37.  Lansing,  1908. 
— Completely  refutes  old  views  of  the  proclamation.  Indispensable  to 
students  of  western  history. 

Alvord,  Clarence  W.,  "  Introduction  "  to  Illinois  Historical  Collec- 
tions, vol.  II.  Springfield,  1907. — Contains  excellent  resum6  of  con- 
ditions in  British  Illinois.  Based  on  original  sources. 

Alvord,  Clarence  W.,  "The  British  Ministry  and  the  Treaty  of  Fort 
Stanwix",  in  Proceedings  of  Wisconsin  Stale  Historical  Society. 
Madison,  1909. — Excellent  for  analysis  of  British  ministry.  Authorita- 
tive. 

Annals  of  the  West.  Embracing  a  Concise  Account  of  the  Principal 
Events  which  have  occurred  in  the  Western  States  and  Territories 
from  the  Discovery  of  the  Mississippi  Valley  to  the  Year  1850.  Edited 
by  James  H.  Perkins,  Cincinnati,  1846.  Revised  by  John  M.  Peck, 
St.  Louis,  1850,  also  by  James  R.  Albach.  Piitsburg,  1858. — Anti- 
quated. Must  be  used  wiih  great  care. 

Babeau,  H.,  Les  Assemblies  GeneraUsdes  Communautes  d*  Habitants 
en  France.  Paris,  1893. 

Babeau,  H.,  Le  Village  sous  I' Ancien  Rfgime.  Paris,  1879. — Neces- 
sary for  an  understanding  of  the  French  village  community  life. 

Beer,  George  L.,  British  Colonial  Policy,  1754-1765. — An  excellent, 
critical  study  of  the  colonial  problems  of  Great  Britain.  He  does  not 
seem  to  appreciate  fully,  however,  the  magnitude  of  the  western  prob- 
lem. 

Benton,  Klbert  J.,  The  Wabash  Trade  Route  in  the  Development 
of  the  Old  Northwest.  J.  H.  U.  Studies.  Baltimore,  1903. — Confined 
altogether  to  printed  sources,  which  have  not  been  used  critically. 
Has  failed  to  grasp  the  larger  aspects  of  the  western  trade. 

Chalmers,  George,  Opinions  of  hmittent  Lawyers  on  Various  Points 
of  English  Jurisprudence.  London,  1858.  —  Valuable  for  gaining 
point  of  view  of  certain  English  officials. 

Coffin,  Victor,  The  Province  of  Quebec  and  the  Early  American 
devolution  :  A  Study  in  English-American  ( 'olonial  History,  Uni- 
versity of  Wisconsin  Bulletin,  vol.  I,  no.  3.  Madison.  1896. — Based  on 
manuscript  as  well  as  printed  sources.  Useful  for  discussion  of  western 


196  BIBLIOGRAPHY 

land  policy  of  Great  Britain.  Some  of  the  conclusions  reached,  how- 
ever, need  revision. 

DeHass,  Willis,  History  oj  the  Earlv  Settlement  and  Indian  Wars 
of  Western  Virginia.  Wheeling,  1851. — Of  some  use  in  study  of 
western  colonization. 

Douglas,  W.  B.,  "  Jean  Gabriel  Cerre,  a  Sketch  ",  in  Transactions 
of  the  Illinois  State  Historical  Society  for  1903.  Springfield,  1904. 

Dunn,  J.  P.,  "  Father  Gibault  ",  in  Transactions  of  the  Illinois  State 
Historical  Society  for  1905.  Springfield,  1906. — Neither  of  the  last- 
named  articles  contribute  anything  new. 

Farrand,  Max,  "The  Indian  Boundary  Line",  in  American  His- 
torical Iff  new,  vol.  X,  pp.  782-791. — Has  missed  many  important 
sources.  Will  have  to  be  rewritten. 

Fernow,  Berthold,  1  he  Ohio  Valley  in  Colonial  Days.  Albany, 
1890. — No  contribution. 

Franz,  Alexander,  Die  Kolonization  des  Mississippitalei  ztim  Aus- 
%ange  der  franz"sischen  Heet  shaft.  Leipzig,  1902. — Of  value  for 
economic  treatment. 

Gale,  Henry,  7 he  Upper  Mississippi  or  Historical  Sketches  of  the 
Mound  Builders,  the  Indian  Tribes  and  the  Progress  oj  Civilization 
in  the  Aorthwetf.  Chicago  and  New  York,  1861. — Valueless. 

Hamilton,  Peter  J.,  Colonial  Mobile.  Boston  and  New  York,  1897. 
— The  author  has  had  access  to  important  material  relating  to  the 
occupation  of  the  West.  lie  has  also  followed  \Vinsor  pretty  closely. 

Harding,  Julia  Morgan,  "Col.  George  Morgan:  His  Family  and 
Times".  Washington  (Pa.)  Obserrer,  May  21,  1904. — Most  complete 
account  of  the  life  of  Morgan  available. 

Hildreth,  Samuel  R.,  lioneer  History:  being  an  Account  of  the  First 
Examinations  of  the  Ohio  Vt'llry,  at;d  the  harly  Settlement  of  the 
North-west  Territory.  Cincinnati,  1848. — Uncritical. 

Hinsdale,  B.  A.,  The  Old  A  orthu-est.  New  York,  1888.— Not  based 
on  original  research.  Very  uncritical. 

Hinsdale,  B.  A.,  "The  Western  Land  Policy  of  the  British  Govern- 
ment from  1763  to  1775",  in  Ohio  Archaolcgical  and  Historical 
Quarterly.  Columbus,  Dec.,  1887. — Uncritical  and  unreliable. 

Hosmer,  James  K.,  A  Short  History  of  the  Mississippi  Valley. 
Boston  and  New  York,  1901. — The  author  has  generalized  from 
secondary  authorities.  Untrustworthy. 

Margry,  P.,  Decouvertes  el  etabl<i.sements  des  fran$ais  dam  L'Anier- 
ique  stptentrionale,  1614-1754,  6  vols.  Paris,  1887. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  197 

Monette,  John  W.,  History  of  the  Discovery  and  Settlement  of  the 
Valley  of  the  Mississippi,  2  vols.  New  York,  1848.  —  Antiquated  and 
unreliable. 

Moore,  Charles,  The  Northwest  under  Three  flags,  1635-1196. 
New  York  and  London,  1900.  —  Has  used  a  few  good  sources  in  an 
uncritical  manner. 

Munro,  William  B.,  The  Seigniorial  System  in  Canada:  A  Study  in 
French  Colunial  Policy.  New  York,  1907.  —  An  excellent,  scientific 
account  of  institutions  in  the  contemporaneous  colony. 

Ogg,  Frederic  A.,  The  Opening  sf  (lie  Mississippi.  New  York,  1904. 
—  A  popular  treatment,  based  on  secondary  authorities.  Of  little  value. 

Roosevelt,  Theodore,  7  he  Winning  of  the  West,^\o\%.  New  York, 
1896.  —  The  author  has  seen  many  important  sources,  but  has  used 
them  uncritically  in  some  instances. 

Rozier,  Firmis  A.,  A  History  of  the  Early  Settlement  of  the  Missis- 
sippi Valley.  St.  Louis,  1890.  —  Of  little  value. 

isato,  shosuke,  A  History  of  the  Land  Question  in  the  United  States. 
J.  II.  U.  Studies.  Baltimore,  1886.  —  Superficial. 

Schuyler,  Robert  L.,  The  Transition  in  Illinois  from  British  to 
American  Government.  New  York,  1909.  —  Has  made  excellent  use 
oi  the  printed  sources. 

bioussat,  St.  George  L.,  The  English  Statutes  in  Maryland.  J.  H. 
U.  Studies.  Baltimore,  1903.  —  Very  useful. 

Thwaites,  Reuben  G.,  "  Early  Lead-ruining  in  Illinois  and  Wiscon- 
sin ",  in  Annual  Report  of  American  Historical  Association,  1893.  — 
Good. 

Turner,  Frederick  J.,  Character  and  Influence  of  the  Indian  Trade 
in  Wisconsin.  J.  H.  U.  Studies.  —  Suggestive  treatment. 

Viollet,  P.,  Histoire  du  Droit  Civil  trancais  (third  edition).     Paris, 


Walker,  Charles  J.,  "The  Northwest  during  the  Revolution",  in 
Michigan  Pioneer  and  Historical  Collections,  vol.  III.  —  Of  little  value. 

Walton,  Frederick  Parker,  'J  he  Scope  and  Interpretation  of  the  Civil 
Code  of  Lower  Canada.  Montreal,  1907.  —  A  sound  work. 

\\  hittelsey,  Charles,  "  The  Origin  of  Land  Surveys  ",  in  Journal  of 
the  Association  of  Engineering  Societies,  vol.  Ill,  no.  II.  —  Contro- 
versial. Relates  to  authorship  of  the  Historical  Account  of  the  Ex- 
pedition of  Colonel  Bouquet  against  the  Ohio  Indians. 

\\  insor,  Justin,  '1  he  Mississippi  Basin.  Boston,  1895.  —  Covers  early 
part  of  the  period.  Chief  objection  is  the  absence  of  reference  to 
sources.  Seems  generally  accurate. 


198  BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Winsor,  Justin,  The  Westward  Movement  of  the  Colonies  and  the 
Republic  west  of  the  Alleghanies,  1763-1798.  Boston,  1897. — No 
foot-notes.  Based  on  vast  amount  of  material,  but  interpretations  of 
events  in  the  West  during  the  British  period  not  altogether  reliable. 

STATE  AND  LOCAL  HISTORIES. 

A  single  criticism  will  be  sufficient  for  the  greater  part  of  the  follow- 
ing works.  \Vith  a  few  exceptions,  to  which  attention  will  be  called,, 
they  are  almost  worthless.  Sufficient  citations  have  already  been  made 
in  the  foot-notes  to  indicate  the  uncritical  and  unreliable  character  of 
most  of  the  writings  on  western  and  Illinois  history. 

Alerding,  H.,  A  Histoty  of  the  Catholic  Church  in  the  Diocese  of 
Vincennes.  Indianapolis,  1883. 

Billon,  Frederick  L.,  Annals  of  St.  Louis  in  its  Early  Days  under 
French  and  Spanish  Dominations,  2  vols.  St.  Louis,  1886. — Necessary 
for  the  eaily  history  of  St.  Louis.  The  work  of  an  antiquarian. 

Blanchard,  Rufus,  History  of  Illinois  to  accompany  an  Historical 
Map  of  the  Stale.  Chicago,  1883. 

Boggess,  Arthur  Clinton,  The  Settlement  of  Illinois,  1778-1830* 
Chicago,  1908. — Contains  important  references  for  study  of  land  ques- 
tion. 

Bieese,  Sidney,  Early  History  of  Illinois.  Chicago,  1884. — Entirely 
untrustworthy. 

Brown,  Henry,  The  History  of  Illinois,  from  its  first  Discovery  and 
Settlement,  to  the  Present.  New  York,  1884. 

Butler,  Mann,  History  of  Kentucky.  Louisville,  1834. — Contains 
important  documentary  appendix. 

Claiborne,  J.  F.  H.,  Mississippi  as  a  Province,  Territory  and  Stale. 
Jackson,  1880. 

Craig,  O.  J.,  "Ouiatanon  ",  in  Indiana  Historical  Society  Publica- 
tions, II.  Indianapolis,  1895. 

Davidson,  A.,  and  B.  Stuv6,  A  Complete  History  of  Illinois  from 
1763-1884.  Springfield,  1884. 

Dillon,  John  B.,  7  he  History  of  Indiana,  2  vols.  Indianapolis, 
1843. — Most  oiiginal  ol  all  the  series  of  state  histories. 

Dunn,  J.  P ,  jr.,  Indiana:  A  Redemption  fr>.m  Slavery.  Boston 
and  New  York.  1888. — Fair.  Has  not  used  all  the  available  material. 

Gayarre,  C.  E.,  A  History  of  Louisiana,  3  vols.  New  Orleans,  1906. 
— The  best  that  is  available. 

Gerhard,  Fred.,  Illinois  as  it  is.     Chicago  and  Philadelphia,  1857. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 


199 


History  of  Monroe,  Randolph  and  Parry  Counties,  Illinois.  Phila- 
delphia, 1883. 

History  of  St.  Clair  County.,  Illinois.    Philadelphia,  1881. 

Houck,  Louis,  A  History  of  Missouri,  3  vols.  Chicago,  1908. — An 
accurate,  scientific  work.  Of  little  value,  however,  for  the  present  study. 

Mason,  Edward  G.,  Chapters  from  Illinois  history.    Chicago,  1901. 

Mason,  Edward  G.,  Illinois  in  the  Eighteenth  Century ;  Kaskaskia 
and  its  Parish  Records.  Chicago,  1889. — Fair. 

Mason,  Edward  G.,  "  Philippe  de  Rocheblave  and  Rocheblave 
Papers  ",  with  historical  sketch  and  notes,  in  Chicago  Historical  Society 
Collections,  vol.  IV.  Chicago,  1890. — Generally  accurate. 

Moses,  John,  Illinois :  Historical  and  Statistical,  2  vols.  Chicago, 
1889. — The  best  of  the  popular  histories  of  Illinois. 

Moses,  John,  "  Court  of  Inquiry  at  Fort  Chartres  ",  in  Chicago  His- 
torical Society  Collections,  vol.  IV.  Chicago,  1890. — A  brief,  but  good 
sketch. 

Parrish,  Randall,  Historic  Illinois :  The  Romance  of  the  Earlier 
Days.  Chicago,  1906. 

Peyton,  J.  Lewis,  History  of  Augusta  County,  Virginia.  Staunton, 
Va.,  1882. 

Phelps,  Albert,  History  of  Louisiana.  New  York,  1905. — A  read- 
able work,  but  no  contribution. 

Reynolds,  John,  The  Pioneer  History  of  Illinois.   Belleville,  111.,  1852. 

Smith,  George,  A  Studenfs  History  of  Illinois .    Bloomington,  1906. 

Terrage,  Marc  de  Villiers  du,  Les  dernieres  Annees  Je  la  i.omsiane 
franfaise.  Paris,  1903. — Good.  The  author  has  made  better  use  of 
the  colonial  archives  in  Paris  than  any  other  writer.  The  work  con- 
tains important  quotations  from  the  original  sources.  Considerable 
partiality  is  shown  to  Governor  Kerlerec. 

Wallace,  Joseph,  History  of  Illinois  and  Louisiana  under  French 
Rule.  Cincinnati,  1893. — Decidedly  uncritical. 


ERRATA  AND  ADDENDA. 

Page  51,  line  9.  "Pounds  of  ammunition"  should  be  "rounds  of 
ammunition." 

Page  60,  line  6  from  the  top.     "  1766  "  should  be  "  1768  ". 

Page  63,  notes  76  and  78.    "  Jenning's  "  should  be  "  Jennings'. " 

Page  74,  rote  120.    The  source  is  P.  R.  O  ,  Am.  and  W.  I.,  v  .1.  123. 

Page  80,  line  6  from  the  bottom.  In  civil  and  criminal  actions  the 
commissaries  were  to  have  all  the  powers  of  justices  of  the  peace  in 
any  colony.  In  addition  they  were  to  have  summary  jurisdiction — as 
justices  of  the  peace  had  not — of  civil  cases  under  10  pounds  steiling, 
but  in  such  cases  an  appeal  lay  to  the  superintendent,  whose  decision 
was  final. 

Page  101,  note  80.    "  Chapter  VII  "  should  be  "  chapter  VI." 

Page  124,  note  62.  For  the  best  discussion  of  the  altitude  of  the 
British  ministry  towards  western  expansion,  see  Ahord,  '-The  British 
Ministry  and  the  Treaty  of  Fort  Stanwix",  in  Wis.  Hist.  Soc.  I'rocecii- 
ings,  1908,  pp.  165  ff. 

Tage  133,  line  9  from  the  bottom.  "  Shelbourne  "  should  be  "  Shel- 
burne." 

Page  137,  note  102.  Hillsborough's  attitude  at  this  time  is  best 
described  by  Alvord,  in  "  British  Ministry  and  the  Treaty  of  Fort  Sian- 
wix  ",  in  Wis.  Hist.  Soc.  Proceedings,  1908,  p.  179. 

Page  149,  note  16,  line  9  from  the  top.  Dartmouth  prepared  and 
forwarded  to  Illinois  what  he  called  a  "  Sketch  of  Government  for 
Illinois"  should  be  "  Dartmouth  prepared  and  forwarded  to  Illinois 
what  he  tailed  a  '  Sketch  of  Government  for  Illinois '." 

2OO 


INDEX. 


Abbadie,  Eugene  d'.  letters  from, 
to  French  minister,  31  n.;  to 
French  commandants,  33  n.; 
blamed  for  failure  of  Loftus' 
expedition,  33;  Kingsford's 
opinion  of,  33  n.;  Gage  disbe- 
lieves in  complicity  of,  33,  34; 
gives  Loftus  advice  concerning 
Indians,  34;  letters  to,  from 
St.  Ange,  36  n.,  41  n. 

Account  of  the  Proceedings  of  the 
Illinois  and  Wabash  Land 
Companies,  cited,  161  n.  See 
also  Bibliography 

Adair,  James,  History  of  the 
American  Indian,  cited,  160  n. 
See  a/so  Bibliography 

Adams,  H.  B.,  Maryland's  In- 
fluence upon  the  Land  Cessions 
in  the  United  States,  cited,  109 
n.,  140  n.  See  also  Bibliog- 
raphy 

Aix-la-Chapelle,  treaty  of,  2,  103 

Albany  Congress,  123;  considers 
creation  of  western  colonies,  103 

Alden,  George  H.,  Neva  Govern- 
ments West  of  the  Alleghanies 
before  1780,  cited,  103  n.,  104 
n.,  140  n.  See  also  Bibliog- 
raphy 

Algonquin  Indians.  See  Indians, 
Algonquin 

Alleghany  Mountains,  3,  47,  79, 
108,  109  n.,  in,  136,  160  n. 

Alvord,  C.  W.,  Illinois  Historical 
Collections,  vol.  II,  cited,  7  n., 
8  n.,  9  n.,  ion.,  163  n. ;  Illi- 
nois in  the  Eighteenth  Century, 
cited,  9  n. ;  "Genesis  of  the 


Proclamation  of  1763",  cited, 
14  n.,  79  n.,  140  n.;  "The 
British  Ministry  and  the  Treaty 
of  Fort  Stanwix  ",  cited,  200. 
See  also  Bibliography 

America,  I,  2,  5,  13,  25,  28,  31, 
57,  67,  78,  102  n.,  105,  108, 
112,  113,  117,  118,  124  n., 
125  n.,  126  n.,  127  n.,  131, 
149  n.,  160  n. ;  relations  of 
France  and  England  in,  2,  4; 
plan  for  the  management  of 
Indians  in,  16;  agitation  in, 
for  the  establishment  of  western 
colonies,  104 

American  Revolution,  140;  pre- 
vents Quebec  Act  from  becom- 
ing effective  in  West,  26;  rela- 
tion of  western  problem  to,  63 
n. ;  checks  colonizing  schemes, 
144,  162 

American  State  Papers,  Public 
Lands,  cited,  17  n.,  45  n.,  47 
n.,  161  n.  See  also  Bibliog- 
raphy 

Amherst,  Gen.  [Jeffrey],  127; 
letters  from,  to  Lieut. -Col.  Rob- 
ertson, 18  n.;  letters  to,  from 
Johnson,  28  n.,  29  n.,  30  n.; 
from  Bouquet,  31  n. ;  effect 
of  policy  of  economy  of,  on  In- 
dians, 29;  succeeded  by  Gage 
as  commander-in-chief  of  Brit- 
ish army  in  America,  31;  pro- 
poses creation  of  western  settle- 
ments, 127  n.,  129  n. 

Andrew,  Indian  interpreter,  ac- 
companies Lieut.  Fraser  to  Illi- 
nois, 40  n. 


201 


2O2 


INDEX 


Annals  of  the  West,  cited,  34  n., 
109  n.,  140  n.  See  also  Bibli- 
ography 

Annual  Register,  cited,  14  n.,  21. 
See  also  Bibliography 

Annual  Report,  American  His- 
torical Association,  1893,  120 
n.,  124  n.  See  also  Bibliog- 
raphy 

Archives  of  the  Ministry  of  the 
Colonies,  cited,  6  n.,  33  n. 

Arkansas  River,  forms  southern 
boundary  of  Illinois  district,  6 

Articles  of  Agreement  for  the  land 
company  of  1766,  cited,  115 
n.,  Il6n.;  formation  and  terms 
of,  115;  purpose  of,  1 15,  1 16; 
extent  of  territory  in  proposed 
grant,  115,  121  n.;  provision 
for  shareholders  in,  n6n.;  in- 
corporated in  Gov.  Franklin's 
proposals  for  a  colony,  117; 
anticipates  establishment  of  civil 
government  in  Illinois  country, 
119  n.;  Franklin  recommends 
change  of,  to  admit  increased 
membership,  !3On. 

Assembly,  village,  10 

Atlantic  Ocean,  3 

Audit  Office  records,  cited,  52  n. 

Augusta  County,  Va.,  103 

Austria,  I 

Austrian  Succession,  War  of  the,  2 

Babeau,  H..  Le  village  sous  Fan- 
cien  regime,  cited,  10  n.;  Les 
assemlilees  generates  des  com- 
munautes  d  habitants,  cited,  IO 
n.  See  also  Bibliography 

Bacon,  Richard,  72 

Bancroft,  George,  History  of  the 
United  States,  cited,  27  n.,  31 
n.,  66  n.,  127  n.,  147  n.,  149 
n.,  159  n.;  criticism  of  state- 
ments of,  concerning  struggle 
for  civil  government  in  the  Illi- 
nois country,  147  n.,  149  n., 
159  n.  See  also  Bibliography 

Bancroft  Collection  (New  York 
Public  Library),  cited,  31  n., 


32  n.,  33  n.,  34  n.,  35  n.,  37 
n.,  38  n.,  40  n.,  41  n.,  42  n., 
43  n.,  45  n.  See  also  Bibliog- 
raphy 

Barbau,  Jean  Baptiste,  resident  of 
Prairie  du  Rocher,  9:  appointed 
member  of  court  of  judicature, 
68 

Barnsley, ,  letters  to,  from 

Butricke,  64  n.,  65  n.,  66  n., 
68  n. ,  70  n.,  73  n. 

Barrington,  Secretary  of  War,  67; 
letters  to,  from  Gage,  45  n.; 
from  Farmer,  55  n. ;  from  Wil- 
kins,  67  n.,  88  n.,  97  n.,  98  n.; 
advocates  restrictive  policy  to- 
wards West,  108  n.,  136; 
"  Plan  relative  to  the  Out  Posts, 
Indian  Trade  ",  etc.,  cited,  108 
n.,  136  n.;  letter  from,  to  Hal- 
dimand,  162  n. 

Bauvais, ,49  n.;  family  of, 

residents  of  Kaskaskia,  9 

Baynton,  John,  letter  to,  from 
Morgan,  73  n.;  amount  of  share 
of,  in  land  company,  116  n.; 
believes  a  civil  government  will 
be  established  in  Illinois,  1 19  n. 

Baynton  and  Company,  land  grant 
in  Illinois  to,  69  n. 

Baynton  and  Wharton,  letters  to, 
from  Morgan,  60  n.,  61  n.,  62 
n.,  64  n  ,  65  n.,  73  n.,  87  n., 
88  n.,  89  n.,  90  n.,  95  n.,  97 
n.,  98  n.,  99 n.;  from  Maturin, 
74  n. 

Baynton,  Wharton  and  Morgan, 
130  n.;  letters  from,  to  Gage, 
55  n.;  to  Macleane,  83  n.,  95 
n.;  to  Johnson,  105  n.,  121  n., 
123  n.;  hunting  party  sent  out 
by,  attacked  by  Indians,  63  n.; 
land  grant  in  Illinois  to,  69  n.; 
court  of  inquiry  called  to  settle 
disputes  between  Richard  Bacon 
and,  72;  competition  and  suc- 
cess of,  83;  letters  to,  from 
Joseph  Dobson,  83  n.;  from 
Johr.son,  121  n.,  122  n. ;  enter 
into  articles  of  agreement  for 


INDEX 


203 


purchase  of  lands  in  Illinois, 
115;  enter  Vandalia  company, 
140  n. ;  Wilkins'  connection 
with,  broken,  155 

Beauvais.     See  Bauvais 

Bedford  party,  134 

Beer,  G.  L.,  British  Colonial 
Policy,  cited,  31  n.  See  also 
Bibliography 

Benefice,  seigniory  compared  with, 
10 

Bentley  and  Company,  trade  ex- 
tensively in  Illinois  country,  83 

Bienville,  Le  Moine  de,  plan  of, 
with  reference  to  Mississippi 
Valley,  3 

Billou,  H.  Is.,  Annals  of  Si.  Louis, 
cited,  51  n.  See  also  Bibliog- 
raphy 

Blackstone,  William,  Commen- 
taries, cited,  24.  See  also  Bibli- 
ography 

Blanchard,  R.,  History  of  Illinois, 
cited,  51  n.;  Discovery  and 
Conquest  of  the  Northwest, 
cited,  51  n.  See  also  Bibliog- 
raphy 

Bloiiin,  Daniel,  favored  by  court 
of  judicature,  70;  appointed  by 
Illinois  French  as  agent  to 
Gage,  146;  letters  from,  to 
Dartmouth,  146  n.,  147  n.,  149 
n.,  157  n.,  159  n. ;  gives  power 
of  attorney  during  absence  from 
Illinois,  147  n.;  outlines  draft  of 
government  at  request  of  Gage, 
147-148;  Gage's  opinion  of, 
148  n.,  151,  152  n.;  returns 
Gage's  draft  of  government  to 
Haldimand,  149  n.,  150  n.; 
Bancroft's  statements  concern- 
ing part  taken  by,  in  struggle 
for  civil  government,  159  n. 

Blue  Ridge  Mountains,  103 

Board  of  Trade,  6l  n.,  79,  112, 
124,  125,  127  n.,  128,  132, 
136, 138, 141;  Shelburne  presi- 
dent of,  15;  Hillsborough  presi- 
dent of,  15,  16;  plan  of,  for 
regulation  of  the  trade  and 


management  of  the  Indians,  16; 
relations  of  Sir  William  John- 
son with.  18;  Johnson  writes  to, 
concerning  irregular  behavior 
of  traders,  19;  devises  plan  of 
1764  for  management  of  Indian 
affairs,  56;  gives  directions  to 
Indian  superintendents,  57;  ex- 
presses opinion  as  to  policy  to 
be  pursued  towards  West,  78; 
is  solicited  by  land  companies, 
108;  interprets  proclamation  of 
1763,  1 08  n. ;  receives  com- 
munication from  Croghan  rela- 
tive to  establishing  a  colony  in 
Illinois,  III;  Johnson  recom- 
mends colonial  project  to,  122; 
attitude  of,  towards  proposed 
Illinoiscolony,  125  n.,  126, 127; 
Shelburne's  communication  to, 
130-131;  Shelburne's  method 
of  presenting  colonial  plan  to> 
132;  calls  for  opinions  of  mer- 
chants, 132;  power  of,  in  1766, 
133,  134;  makes  adverse  rep  >rt 
on  Shelburne's  recommendation 
for  western  colonies,  134-135; 
discussion  of  report  of,  139- 
140;  report  of,  on  Vandalia 
grant,  140 

Board  of  Trade  Papers  (Historical 
Society  of  Pennsylvania),  cited, 
I9n.,4l  n.,49n.,5in.,  53n., 
59  n.,  83  n.,  86  n.,  90  n.,  91 
n.,  92  n.,  95  n.,  101  n.,  113  n., 
117  n.,  127  n.,  129  n.,  137  n., 
146  n.,  147  n.,  149  n.,  157  n., 
159". 

Boisbriant,  Pierre,  commissioned 
to  govern  Illinois  country,  6; 
lands  of  Prairie  du  Rocher 
owned  by,  II 

Bossu,  M.,  Travels,  cited,  8  n. 
See  also  Bil  >liography 

Bouquet,  Col.  Henry,  30,  39,  IIO 
n. ;  expedition  of,  and  its  re- 
sults, 30;  letters  to,  from  Gage, 
30  n.,  32  n.,  35  n.,  38  n.;  let- 
ters from,  to  Amherst,  32  n.; 
to  Gage,  38  n.;  to  Franklin, 


204 


INDEX 


HO  n.;  effect  of  victory  of, 
up»n  Pontiac,  36 

Bratlstreet,  Col.  John,  leads  force 
along  Lake  Erie,  30;  sends 
Thomas  Morris  into  Indian 
country,  36;  campaign  of,  a 
failure,  37  n. 

Breese,  Sidney,  Early  History  of 
Illinois,  cited,  9  n.,  10  n.  See 
also  Bibliography 

Briand,  Bishop  of  Quebec,  letters 
to,  from  Father  Meurin,  60  n., 
75  n.;  creates  Father  Meurin 
vicar-general  of  Illinois,  75; 
sends  additional  priest  to  Illi- 
nois country,  76 

British  army,  15,  92;  occupies 
most  of  western  posts,  27;  Gage 
succeeds  Amherst  as  comman- 
der-in-chief  rf,  31;  occupies 
Mobile  and  Pensacola,  32; 
official  aid  given,  in  expedition 
of  Maj.  Loftus,  33;  Pontiac 
agrees  to  offer  no  further  resist- 
ance to,  43;  takes  formal  pos- 
session of  Fort  de  Chartres, 
45;  detachment  of,  in  Illinois 
stricken  with  sickness,  73  n. 

British  commandant,  immediate 
duty  of,  after  occupation  of 
Fort  de  Chartres,  46;  problems 
confronting,  49-50 

British  government,  48,  88;  guar- 
antees by,  of  the  rights  of  the 
inhabitants  of  Illinois  under  the 
treaty  of  Paris,  17;  transports 
provisions  from  Fort  Pitt  to  Illi- 
nois country,  55;  is  slow  in 
forming  definite  program  for 
management  of  Indian  affairs, 
56;  officials  of,  fear  Indian  out- 
break in  1768,  63  n.;  expects 
to  inherit  influence  of  French 
among  Indians  of  West,  84; 
loss  of  customs  duty  to,  94;  ex- 
pects to  use  Fort  de  Chartres  to 
protect  trade,  07;  adopts  policy 
of  economy,  113;  anxious  to 
displace  military  government  of 
Illinois:,  158:  annuls  land  grants 
in  Illinois  country,  160-161 


British  ministry,  105,  123  n.,  133; 
discuss  policy  to  be  pursued  to- 
wards West,  13-15;  opposing 
views  in,  14;  purpose  of,  21; 
announces  western  policy  in 
proclamation  of  1763,  108;  atti- 
tude of,  towards  western  colo- 
nization in  1764,  i  II 

British  Museum,  Additional  Man- 
uscripts, cited,  35  n.,  54  n., 
73  n.,  94  n.,  98  n.,  99  n.,  102 
n.,  143  n.,  150  n.,  155  n.,  1156 
n.,  157  n.,  158  n.,  159  n.,  160 
n.,  161  n.,  162  n.  See  also 
Bibliography 

Brown,  H.,  History  of  Illinois, 
cited,  7  n.,  51  n.  See  also 
Bibliography 

Bute,  Lord,  4 

Butler,  M.,  History  of  Kentucky, 
cited,  106  n.,  107  n.,  128  n. 
See  also  Bibliography. 

Butricke,  Ensign,  letters  from,  to 
Barnsley,  64  n.,  65  n.,  66  n., 
68  n.,  70  n.,  73  n.;  assertion 
of,  concerning  number  of  judges 
in  court  of  judicature,  66 

Cabinent,  128,  133;  plan  for  west- 
ern colony  approved  by.  127; 
Shelburne  presents  arguments 
to,  in  favor  of  western  colonies, 
131.  See  also  British  ministry 

Cahnkia,  7,  9,  49;  mission  estab- 
lished at,  5;  foundation  of,  5 
n.;  population  of,  7;  character 
of  land  holdings  at,  10;  parish 
at,  ii;  French  cross  river  at, 
53;  case  of  arbitration  at,  65 
n.;  Sulpitian  property  at,  sold. 
75  n.;  Father  Meurin  resides 
at,  76 

Cahokia  Records,  cited,  50  n. 
See  also  Bibliography 

Calendar  of  Home  Office  Papers, 
7766-7769,  cited,  78  n.  See 
also  Bibliography 

Calvert,  Benedict,  105 

Calvin's  case,  25  n. 

Camden,  Lord,  160 

Campbell,  Lieut.,  letter  to,  from 


INDEX 


205 


Fraser,  41  n.;  letter  from,  to 

Johnson,  51  n. 
Campbell,  James,  68 
Campbell  v.  Hall,  case  of,  cited, 

25 

Canada,  15,  27,  45,  84,  94;  pop- 
ulation of,  2;  separated  from 
English  colonies  by  line  of  forts, 
3;  immigrants  from,  in  Illinois, 
5,  7,  8;  cession  of,  to  England, 
8;  portion  of,  reserved  for  In- 
dians, 15;  proposal  to  place 
West  within  jurisdiction  of,  15; 
liberty  of  Catholic  religion  given 
to,  by  treaty  of  Paris,  45;  Illi- 
nois country  described  as  part 
of,  by  treaty  of  Paris,  47;  fur- 
trade  of,  77,  92  n.,  94;  state- 
ment of  Shelburne  concerning 
exports  and  imports  of,  05  n.; 
proposed  removal  of  Illinois 
trench  to,  154;  state  of  affairs 
in,  1763-1773,  161;  instruc- 
tions to  governor  of,  respecting 
the  Illinois  country,  162 

Canadian  Archives,  series  A,  cited, 
Son.,  32  n.,  35  n.,  36  n.,  38 
n.;  series  B,  cited,  53  n.,  99 
n.,  143  n.,  148  n.,  149  n.,  152 
n.,  155  n.,  156  n.,  157  n.,  158 
n.,  159  n.,  160  n.,  161  n.; 
series  Q,  cited,  85  n.,  88  n., 
89  n. 

Canadian  Archives  Report,  for 
1885,  cited,  150  n.;  for  1904, 
cited,  56  n.,  80  n. ;  for  1905, 
cited,  31  n.,  33  n.,  36  n.,  38  n., 
41  n.  See  also  Bibliography 

Canadian  Constitutional  Develop- 
ment (ed.  Egerton  and  Grant), 
cited,  25  n.  See  also  Bibliog- 
raphy 

Cape  au  Gres,  suggestion  for  settle- 
ment at,  99  n. 

Captain  of  militia.  See  French 
officials 

Carleton,  Gov.  Guy,  letters  to, 
from  Johnson,  85  n.,  88  n.; 
from  Hillsborough.Sgn  ;  letters 
from,  to  Johnson,  92  n. 


Carlisle,  Pa.,  39 

Catholic  missionaries,  establish 
missions  at  Cahokia  and  Kas- 
kaskia,  5 

Cecirre,  Antoine,  65 

C61oron,  M.,  4 

Cerr6,  family  of,  9 

Chalmers,  George,  Collection  of 
Treaties,  ciied,  5  n. ;  Opinions 
of  Eminent  Lawyers,  cited,  127 
n.  See  also  Bibliography 

Charleston,  S.  C.,  32 

Charleville,  Joseph,  49  n.,  70  n. ; 
family  of,  residents  of  Kaskas- 
kia,  9;  appointed  member  of 
court  of  judicature  in  1770,  69; 
holds  power  of  attorney  from 
Bloiiin,  147  n. 

Chartres  village,  Indian  depreda- 
tions near,  63;  meetings  of 
court  of  judicature  at,  71  n. ; 
controversy  over  holding  court 
at,  71 

Chatham,  Earl  of,  papers  of,  re- 
ferred to,  105  n.;  papers  of 
Mississippi  Land  Company  sent 
to,  1090.;  becomes  prime  min- 
ister, 123;  attitude  of  ministry 
of,  towards  America,  133 

Chatham  Papers,  cited,  44  n.,  45 
n.,  51  n.,  52  n.,  53  n.,  105  n., 
106  n.,  107  n.,  109  n.,  12811. 

Cherokee  Indians.  See  Indians, 
Cherokee 

Cherokee  River,  ic6  n.,  144  n. 

Chicago  Historical  Society  Collec- 
tions, cited,  58  n.,  64  n.,  66  n., 
70  n.,  72  n.  See  also  Bibliog- 
raphy 

Chickasaw  Indians.  See  Indians, 
Chickasaw 

China,  Company  of,  6  n. 

Chippewa  Indians.  See  Indians, 
Chippewa 

Choctaw  Indians.  See  Indians, 
Choctaw 

Choiseul,  Gabriel  de,  4 

Church,  assembly  at,  to;  descrip- 
tion of,  in  Illinois,  1 1 

Church  of  England.    See  England 


2O6 


INDEX 


Civil  government  in  the  Illinois 
country,  79,  105  n. ;  move- 
ment for  establishment  of,  in 
1768,  60-6 1,  98  n.;  promoters 
of  western  colony  in  1766 
expect  establishment  of,  119 
n. ;  proposed  in  Gov.  Frank- 
lin's plan  for  colony,  119; 
struggle  for,  1770-1774,  145- 
163;  Bloiiin  and  Clazon  draw 
up  rough  draft  for,  147;  pro- 
posal f»r,  rejected  by  govern- 
ment, 148,  152  n. ;  Gage  and 
Hillsborough  write  in  opposi- 
tion to,  148  n. ;  Gage  outlines 
plan  for,  149,  150-151;  Hamil- 
ton addresses  Illinois  French  on 
subject  of,  151;  Gage  writes 
concerning  ideas  of  Illinois 
French  on  subject  of,  151-152; 
Lord's  report  concerning  atti- 
tude of  inhabitants  towards,  159 

Clai borne,  J.,  History  of  Missis- 
sippi, 33  n.  See  also  Biblio- 
graphy 

Clare,  Lord,  125,  134 

Clark,  George  Rogers,  effects  con- 
quest of  Illinois,  163 

Clazon,  William,  147  n.,  149  n., 
152  n.,  159  n.;  chosen  by 
Bloiiin  as  associate  on  mission 
to  Gage,  146;  sketch  of  gov- 
ernment presented  to  Gage 
probably  the  work  of,  148; 
Gage's  opinion  of,  148  n.,  151, 
152  n.;  signs  Gage's  draft  of 
government,  I5on. 

Clive,  [Robert],  4 

Coffin,  Victor,  The  Province  of 
Quebec  and  the  Early  Ameri- 
can Revolution,  cited,  140  n., 
150  n.,  162  n.  See  also  Bib- 
liography 

Golden,  Gov.  C.,  letters  to,  from 
Johnson,  29  n.,  30  n. 

Cole,  Kdward,  appointed  com- 
missary of  Indian  affairs  in 
the  Illinois  country,  57;  letters 
from,  to  Johnson,  57  n.,  59  n., 
61  n.,  74  n. ;  to  Croghan,  58 


n. ;  Gage  refuses  bills  drawn  by, 
58  n.;  arrival  of,  at  Fort  de 
Chartres,  59;  provides  shelter 
for  Indians,  63;  recalled  from 
Illinois,  74;  Gage's  estimate  of 
expenses  incurred  in  the  Illinois 
country  by,  95  n. 

Colony,  attempts  at  establishment 
of,  in  Illinois  prior  to  1763, 
103-105;  plan  of  Mississippi 
Land  Company  for  establish- 
ment of,  105-108;  effect  of 
proclamation  of  1763  on  pro- 
jects for,  108;  attitude  of 
Charles  Lee  toward  establish- 
ment of,  in  Illinois,  109-110; 
of  Shelburne,  no,  124,  125, 
126-127,  129,  130,  131,  132, 
T36,  137;  of  Gage,  114,  115, 
127  n.;  of  Gov.  Franklin,  116, 
II7-I2I,  125  n.;  of  Johnson, 
1 19  n.,  122  n.,  123;  of  Lyman, 
124;  plan  of  1766  for,  ni- 
112,  115-127;  description  of 
plan  for,  submitted  to  Board  of 
Trade,  128-130;  opposition  to 
establishment  of,  134-144 

Commandant.  See  French  offi- 
cials 

Commissary.     See  French  officials 

Common?,  laws  of,  extended  to 
Illinois  by  French,  10 

Company  of  China.  See  China, 
Company  of 

Company  of  the  East  Indies.  See 
East  Indies,  Company  of 

Company  of  the  Indies.  See  In- 
dies, Company  of  the 

Company  of  the  West.  See  West, 
Company  of  the 

Corr.pte,  Jacques,  65  n. 

Connecticut,  124,  147  n.,  148 

Connolly,  John,  144  n. 

Considerations  on  the  Agreement 
with  the  Honourable  Thomas 
Walpole,  cited,  109  n.,  129  n., 
130  n. 

Conway,  Sir  Henry,  125,  133; 
letters  to,  from  Gage,  19  n.,  42 
n.,  43  n.,  44  n.,  45  n.,  49  n., 


INDEX 


207 


54  n.,  55  n.,  75  n.,  76  n.,  91 
n.,  98  n.,  113  n.;  from  John- 
son, 122  n.;  opinion  of,  re- 
specting inclusion  of  West  in 
cession  of  1763,  78  n.;  letter 
from,  to  Gage,  78  n.;  leaves 
ministry,  123;  Franklin's  opin- 
ion concerning,  123  n. 

"Council,  Copy  of,  held  at  the 
Illinois  in  April",  1765  ",  cited, 
38  n. 

Court,  clerk  of.  See  French  offi- 
cials 

Court  of  arbitration,  65,  156  n. 

Court  of  inquiry,  72;  proceedings 
of,  cited,  72  n. 

Court  of  judicature,  establishment 
and  purpose  of,  65;  authority 
for  establishment  of,  discussed, 
66-67;  history  of,  68-72; 
changes  in  composition  of,  69; 
power  of,  extended,  69-70; 
attitude  of,  towards  French, 
70;  breaks  with  Wilkins,  71; 
controversy  over  place  of  met t- 
ing  of,  71;  petitions  Wilkins 
not  to  interfere  with  its  pro- 
ceedings, 72;  abolished,  72; 
effect  of  abolition  of,  on  inhab- 
itants, 145;  later  cessions  of, 

145  n- 

Court  of  King's  Bench,  designed 
for  Illinois,  162 

Court  Record,  MS.  (Chester,  111.), 
cited,  65  n.,  66  n.,  67  n.,  68 
n.,  69  n.,  70  n.,  71  n.,  72  n., 
145  n.,  146  n. 

Courts,  local  village,  65 

Crawford,  a  trader,  41  n.;  accom- 
panies John  Ross  to  Fort  de 
Chartres,  37 

Crawford,  Hugh,  letters  to,  from 
Fraser,  40  n, 

Croghan,  Col.  George,  38  n.,  39, 
40,  43,  49,  112,  144  n.;  sent 
by  Johnson  as  deputy  to  In- 
dians, 38;  account  of  journey 
of,  from  Carlisle  to  Fort  Pitt, 
39>  "Journal  of  Transactions" 
(Parkman  Coll.),  cited,  39  n., 


40  n.;  statement  of,  relative  to 
Sinnott,  40  n.;  experiences  of, 
on  journey  down  the  Ohio,  41— 
42;  "Journal  of"  (Thwaites), 
cited,  42  n.,  43  n.;  begins 
negotiations  with  western  In- 
dians, 42-43;  Sterling's  doubts 
concerning  peace  made  by,  45 
n.;  letters  to,  from  Johnson, 
45  n.,  58  n.,  112  n.;  letters 
from,  to  Gage,  53  n.,  59  n.; 
to  Johnson,  58  n.,  5911.,  60  n., 
Ill  n.,  112  n.,  116  n.,  119  n., 
121  n  ,  122  n.;  to  B.  Franklin, 
86  n.,  93  n.,  98  n.;  undertakes 
second  mission  to  western  In- 
dians, 58;  instructions  to,  1766, 
cited,  58  n.;  negotiates  general 
peace  with  Indians,  59;  state- 
ment of,  respecting  contraband 
trade,  86  n.;  plans  of,  for  estab- 
lishment of  colony  in  the  Illi- 
nois country,  Hi;  sent  to  Eng- 
land by  Johnson,  in  n.;  in- 
structed by  Johnson  to  inves- 
tigate property  of  French  in 
Illinois,  H2  n.;  enters  land 
company  for  settlement  of  Illi- 
nois, 115;  transmits  Gov. 
Franklin's  proposals  for  colony 
to  Johnson,  121  n.;  letters  and 
journals  of,  123 

Cuba,  126 

Gumming,  Thomas,  106  n.,  128; 
letters  to,  from  Mississippi  Land 
Company,  io6n.,  10711.,  128  n. 

Customs  accounts,  cited,  94  n. 

Dartmouth,  Lord,  140  n.,  147, 
159  n.;  letters  from,  to  Cra- 
mahe,  16  n.;  to  Gage,  153  n., 
154  n.,  155  n.,  I57n.,  161  n.; 
to  Haldimand,  157  n.,  161  n. ; 
to  Johnson,  157  n.;  succeeds 
Hillsborough  as  secretary  of 
state,  140  n.,  149  n.;  letters  to, 
from  lilouin,  146  n.,  147  n., 
157  n.,  159  n.;  from  Gage, 
91  n.,  93n  ,  146  n.,  147  n., 
148  n.,  149  n.,  158  n.;  from 


208 


INDEX 


Haldimand,  157  n.,  161  n.; 
attitude  of,  towards  civil  gov- 
ernment for  Illinois,  149  n., 
153;  expresses  concern  over 
status  of  the  Illinois  country, 

154-155 

Davidson,  A.,  and  B.  Stuv6.  A 
Complete  History  of  Illinois, 
cited,  66  n.,  70  n.  See  also 
Bibliography 

Davion's  Bluff,  32 

De  Hars,  W..  History  of  the 
Early  Settlement  and  Indian 
Wars  of  Western  Virginia, 
109  n.  See  also  Bibliography 

Delaware  Indians.  See  Indians, 
Delaware 

Detroit,  3,  59,  in;  occupation 
of,  27;  holds  out  against  Pon- 
tiac,  29;  advance  of  Bradstreet 
to,  30;  Pontiac's  attempt  to 
capture,  30;  Bradstreet's  cam- 
paign in  vicinity  of,  36;  escape 
of  Capt.  Morris  to,  37;  Cro- 
ghan  concludes  peace  with  In- 
dians at,  43;  Shelburne  pro- 
poses establishment  of  colony 
near,  129;  proposed  colony  at, 
131  n.,  132 

Dictionary  of  National  Biog- 
raphy, cited,  50  n. 

Dillon,  J.,  History  of  Indiana, 
cited,  17  n.,  46  n.  See  also 
Bibliography 

Dinwiddie,  Gov.  [Robert],  III 
n..  128 

Dobson,  Joseph,  letter  from,  to 
Baynton,  \Vharton  and  Mor- 
gan, 83  n. 

Documents  relating  to  the  Colo- 
nial History  of  the  State  of  New 
York,  cited,  28  n.,  30  n.,  34 
n. ,  38  n. ,  39  n. ,  40  n. ,  43  n. , 
45  n.,  51  n.,  55  n.,  56  n.,  57 
n.,  58  n.,  59  n.,  6l  n.,  64  n., 
73  n.,  74  n.,  79  n.,  Son.,  8l 
n.,  85  n.,  86  n. ,  89  n.,  98  n., 
IO2  n.,  in  n.,  112  n.,  127  n., 
129  n.,  132  n.,  134  n.,  137  n. 
See  also  Bibliography 


Documents  relating  to  the  Consti- 
tutional History  of  Canada, 
J759-f79r  (ed.  Shortt  and 
Doughty),  cited,  5  n.,  7  n.,  14 
n.,  15  n.,  16  n.,  17  n.,  22  n., 
25  n.,  47  n.,  48  n.,  79  n.,  81 
n.,  88  n.,  108  n.,  162  n.  See 
also  Bibliography 

Dunmore  War,  157  n. 

Dunn,  J.  P.,  History  of  Indiana, 
cited,  51  n.,  58  n.  See  also 
Bibliography 

East  Florida.     See  Florida 

East  Indies,  Company  of,  6  n. 

Edinburgh,  104 

Egremont,  Lord,  14,  15;  letter 
from,  to  Lords  of  Trade,  14  n. 

Eidington,  Lieut.,  lettersof,44 n., 
45  n.,  51  n.,  52  n.,  53n.,6qn. 

England,  28,  77,  84,  90,  91,  92, 
95  n.,  96,  101,  105,  in,  116 
n.,  117,  119,  122,  125,  128, 
13011.,  131,  141  n.,  149,  156, 
160  n.;  relation  of,  to  France 
in  America,  I ;  cession  of  Illi- 
nois country  to,  7;  influence 
of,  in  Upper  Ohio  Valley,  84; 
importation  of  furs  into,  86,  87, 
94;  promise  of  aid  to  Indians 
against,  89;  dispute  between, 
and  Spain  over  Falkland  Is- 
lands, 101,  143;  agitation  in, 
for  establishment  of  western 
colonies,  104,  105;  Mississippi 
Land  Company  maintains  agent 
in,  106;  Croghan's  statement 
regarding  attitude  of,  towards 
western  colonization,  110—  in; 
established  church  of,  provision 
for,  in  plan  for  colony  in  the 
Illinois  country,  !2On.;  political 
situation  in,  in  1767,  133; 
Spain  yields  to  demands  of,  144 

England,  Political  History  of  (ed. 
Hunt  and  1'oole),  cited,  4  n., 
123  n.,  134  n.,  143  n.,  149  n. 

Engli>h  army.     S'e  British  army 

English  government.  See  British 
government 


INDEX 


209 


English   law,    application   of,   to 

West,  24-25 

English  merchants.     See  Traders 
English  settlers,  warning  of  C^le- 

ron  to,  4 

English  troops.     See  British  army 
Erie,  Lake,  30,  129 
Europe,    8,    117;     situation    in, 

leading  to  Seven  Years'  War, 

1-2 

Evans,  Lewis,  124 

Expediency  of  securing  our  Amer- 
ican Colonies  by  settling  the 
Country  adjoining  the  River 
Mississippi,  contents  of,  de- 
scribed, 104,  H7n.  See  also 
Bibliography 

Falkland  Islands,  101,  143 

Farmer,  Maj.  Robert,  44,  51 
n>»  54»  55  n-»  sends  Lieut. 
Ross  to  Illinois  on  mission  to 
Indians,  37;  letters  to,  from 
Ross,  37  n.,  38  n.;  letters  from, 
to  Gage,  49  n.,  51  n.,  53  n., 
54  n.;  to  Haldimand,  54  n. ; 
to  Barrington,  55  n. ;  takes 
command  of  Fort  de  Chartres, 
51;  misrepresented  to  French 
in  Illinois,  53  n.;  superseded 
in  command  of  Fort  de  Chartres 
by  Col.  Reed,  55 

Fitzhugh,  Henry,  105 

Fitzmaurice,  Edmund,  Life  of 
Shetburne,  cited,  133  n.,  140 
n.  See  also  Bibliography 

Flagg,  Edmund,  65  n.;  The  Far 
West,  cited,  65  n.,  66  n.,  68  n. 
See  also  Bibliography 

Florida,  18  n.,  51  n.,  99,  100, 
135,  143,  188;  cession  of,  to 
England,  6;  civil  government 
extenc'ed  to,  by  proclamation 
of  1763,  14,  23;  posts  in,  occu- 
pied by  English  troops,  32 

Forbes,  Capt.  Hugh,  62  n.,  64, 
89  n.;  takes  command  of  Fort 
de  Chartres,  61;  orders  of,  to 
English  and  French,  62;  prepa- 
rations of,  to  meet  Indian 


attack,  63;  letters  from,  to 
Gage,  64  n.,  93  n.,  96  n.;  at- 
tempts to  regulate  trade,  93, 
96  n. 

"Forbes,  Capt.,  Information  of 
the  State  of  Commerce  given 
by,  1768",  87  n.,  89  n. 

Forget,  Father  M.,  75  n. 

Fort  Adams.     See  Davion's  Bluff 

Fort  de  Chartres,  18,  19  n.,  30, 
40,  43,  46,  50  n.,  53  n.,  55, 
57,  60,  69  n.,  70  n.,  71,  75, 
83.  90,  93.  96  n.,  97  n.,  98  n., 
113,  119  n.,  144,  156  n.;  order 
for  erection  of,  6;  statement  by 
George  Phyn  concerning  gov- 
ernment of,  20  n.;  English 
possession  of,  23;  troops  de- 
signed for,  32;  St.  Ange  trans- 
ferred to,  35;  de  Villiers  leaves, 
36;  preparations  to  send  troops 
from,  37;  Croghan  invited  to, 
43;  preparations  for  relief  of, 
44;  final  occupation  of,  45; 
articles  of  surrender  of,  cited, 
45  n.;  lack  of  sufficient  supplies 
at,  51-52;  supplies  sent  to,  54; 
Indian  representatives  sent  to, 
58;  Col.  Reed  in  command  of, 
60;  preparations  to  meet  Indian 
attack  on,  63;  Indian  depre- 
dations in  vicinity  of,  73; 
trade  carried  on  at,  82,  87; 
estimate  of  Indian  expenses  at, 
95;  intention  of  British  regard- 
ing use  of,  97;  plan  for  main- 
tenance of,  1 18;  destruction 
of,  156 

Fort  Gage,  156,  162 

Fort  Massac,  32,  44 

Fort  Miami,  27 

Fort  Pitt,  20  n.,  31,  39,  40  n., 
43>  44>  5l  "•>  59  n->  !4i ;  holds 
out  against  Pontiac,  29;  Bou- 
quet raises  siege  of,  30;  prepa- 
rations to  send  troops  to  Illi- 
nois from,  38;  goods  sent  to, 
39;  Croghan  at,  39,  41;  pro- 
visions sent  to  Illinois  from, 
55;  rendezvous  for  English 


2IO 


INDEX 


traders,  82;  instructions  to 
commander  of,  regarding  Eng- 
lish  traders,  91 ;  orders  to  send 
French  traders  as  prisoners  to, 

93 

Fort  Stanwix,  140  n.,  144 

Fox  River,  88 

France,  18  n.,  29,  47,  53,  77,  84, 
98  n.;  aggressions  of,  i,  2;  re- 
lations of,  with  England  in 
America,  2-5,  28,  84;  cession 
of  Louisiana  and  New  Orleans 
to  Spain  by,  5;  immigrants 
from,  in  Illinois,  7-8;  organ- 
ization of  village  community 
and  system  of  land  tenure  in, 
10;  orders  sent  from,  to  evacu- 
ate Illinois,  27;  Jesuits  expelled 
from  Illinois  by  order  of,  75; 
methods  employed  by,  in  deal- 
ing with  Indians,  84-85;  furs 
sent  to,  from  Illinois,  90,  95 
n.,  96 

Franklin,  Benjamin,  79  n.,  116, 
121  n.,  123  n.,  128,  134,  136, 
137,  141;  Works  of  (ed. 
Sparks),  cited,  78  n.;  Works 
of  (ed.  Bigelow),  cited,  79  n., 
81  n.,  109  n.,  non.,  119  n., 
121  n.,  123  n.,  124  n.,  125  n., 
126  n.,  127  n.,  129  n.,  132  n., 
137  n.,  140  n.;  letters  to,  from 
Croghan,  86  n.,  93  n.,  98  n.; 
from  Bouquet,  no  n.;  from 
Johnson,  122  n.;  from  W. 
Franklin,  123  n.;  from  T. 
Wharton,  130  n.;  statement 
of,  relative  to  Mississippi  Land 
Company,  109  n.;  letters  from, 
to  W.  Franklin,  no  n.,  119 
n.,  122  n.,  123  n.,  124  n.,  125 
n.,  126  n.,  127  n.,  129  n.,  132 
n.,  137  n.;  to  Johnson,  122  n., 
123 n.;  part  taken  by,  in  estab- 
lishment of  Illinois  colony,  122, 
123,  124,  125,  126,  130  n., 
132,  140  n.;  Works  of  (ed. 
Smythe),  cited,  123  n.  See  also 
Bibliography 

Franklin  Papers  (American  Phil- 


osophical Society),  cited,  no 
n.,  117  n.,  119  n.,  123  n.,  144 
n.  See  also  Bibliography 

Franklin  Papers,  Calendar  of  the 
(ed.  Hays  i,  cited,  non.  See 
also  Bibliography 

Franklin,  Gov.  William,  6 1  n., 
119  n.,  121  n.,  130  n.;  letters 
to,  from  B.  Franklin,  no  n., 
119  n.,  122  n.,  123  n.,  124  n., 
125  n.,  126  n.,  127  n.,  129  n., 
132  n.,  137  n.;  from  Johnson, 
121  n.,  122  n.,  127  n.;  part 
taken  by,  for  establishment  of 
Illinois  colony,  115,  116,  117, 
119-121,  122  n.,  142;  letters 
from,  to  B.  Franklin,  Ii7n., 
123  n. 

Franks  and  Company,  83 

Franz,  A.,  Die  Kolonizalion  des 
Mississippitales,  cited,  10  n. 
See  also  Bibliography 

Fraser,  Lieut.,  40  n.,  43,  50  n.; 
goes  to  Illinois,  38-39,  40;  ex- 
periences of,  with  Indians,  40- 
41 ;  letters  from,  to  Crawford,  40 
n.;  to  Gage,  40 n.,  41  n.,  53  n.; 
to  Campbell,  41  n.;  report  of 
death  of,  41  n.;  accusations  of, 
against  St.  Ange,  53  n.;  "Re- 
port on  an  Exploratory  Survey", 
cited,  53  n. 

Frederick  the  Great,  2,  4 

French,  of  the  Illinois  country,  29, 
3X>  36*  59>  72,  112  n.,  121  n.; 
original  purpose  of  colony  of, 
5;  origin  of,  7;  character  of, 
8-9;  description  of  government 
of,  9-10;  character  of  land 
holdings  of,  10-11;  character- 
ization of  church  of,  u;  pro- 
visions for  government  of,  14, 
15-18,  21,  24-25,  49,  64-66, 
70  n.,  145,  149-15°.  ISS-^S. 
158,  161-162;  charge  English 
high  prices  for  goods,  52;  ex- 
tent of  migration  of,  in  1765, 
53  n.;  Farmer  issues  proclama- 
tion to,  54  n.;  attempts  of,  to 
stir  up  Indians,  55-56,  64  n.; 


INDEX 


211 


relations  of,  with  British  com- 
mandants, 60,  61,  62,  64,  71, 
157;  friction  among,  64,  65; 
attitude  of,  towards  Morgan, 
68;  religious  privileges  ac- 
corded, 76;  trade  carried  on 
by,  28,  86-87,  89-90;  Gage 
recommends  establishment  of 
colony  on  lands  vacated  by, 
113-114;  company  formed  to 
purchase  land  from,  115-116; 
actions  of,  relative  to  civil  gov- 
ernment, 146,  147  n.,  151,  152, 
159.  See  also  Traders,  French 

French  and  Indian  War,  4,  49, 
124 

French  officials,  9,  10,  31,  33,  34, 

49.  5°.  6S  n- 

French  traders.     See  Traders 
Fur-trade.     See  Trade 

Gage,  Gen.  Thomas,  30,  32,  35, 
38,  44,  45  n.,  48,  49  n.,  51, 
54  n.,  57  n.,  67,  70  n.,  95  n., 
96  n.,  99,  127,  138,  151,  153, 
156;  proclamation  of,  to  in- 
habitants of  Illinois,  17,  24, 
46-47;  proposes  military  gov- 
ernment for  Illinois,  18,  114; 
letters  from,  to  Hillsborough, 
19  n.,  20  n.,  21  n.,  58  n.,  61 
n.,  62  n.,  64  n.,  67  n.,  73  n., 
74  n.,  78  n.,  83  n.,  87  n.,  88 
n.,  89  n.,  90  n.,  92  n.,  93  n., 
95  n.,  97  n.,  98  n.,  99  n.,  101 
n.,  127  n.,  139  n.,  143  n.,  144 
n.,  146  n.,  148  n.,  149  n.,  156 
n.,  157  n.;  to  Shelburne,  23 
n.,  55  n.,  59  n.,  62  n.,  64  n., 
86  n.,  87  n.,  89  n.,  90  n.,  91 
n.;  to  Bouquet,  30  n.,  32  n., 
35  n.,  38  n.;  to  Halifax,  31  n., 
32  n.,  34  n.,  35  n.,  37  n.,  98 
n.;  to  Haldimand,  35  n.,  73 
n.,  99  n.,  148  n.,  149  n.,  152 
n.,  155  n.,  156  n.,  158  n.,  160 
n.;  to  Johnson,  40  n.,  41  n., 
45  n.,  54  n.,  57  n.,  59  n.,  61 
n.,  64  n.,  73  n.,  74  n.,  91  n., 
92  n.,  93  n.,  95  n.,  96  n.,  97 


n.,  98  n.,  156  n.,  157  n.;  to 
Conway,  42  n.,  43  n.,  44  n., 
45  n.,  49  n.,  51  n.,  55  n.,  75 
n.,  76  n.,  91  n.,  98  n.,  113  n.; 
to  Barrington,  45  n.;  to  Dart- 
mouth, 91  n.,  93  n.,  146  n., 
147  n.,  148  n.,  158  n.;  to  Pow- 
nall,  147  n.;  to  Hamilton,  151 
n.;  letters  to,  from  Hillsbo- 
rough, 21  n.,  23  n.,  64  n.,  67 
n.,  73  n.,  97  n.,  99  n.,  100  n., 
101  n.,  134  n.,  135  n.,  139  n., 

142  n.,  148  n.,  154  n.,  156  n.; 
from  Robertson,  32  n.,  33  n.; 
from  Loftus,   32  n.,  33  n.,  34 
n.;   from  Bouquet,  38  n  ;  from 
Johnson,  38  n.,  61  n.,  91  n., 
92  n.;   from  Fraser,  40  n.,  41 
n  ,  53  n.;  from  Sterling,  44  n., 
45  n.,  48  n.,  49  n.,  50  n.,  51 
n.,  52  n.,  53  n.,  56  n.,  75  n.; 
from  Farmer,  49  n.,  51  n.,  53 
n.,  54  n.;    from   Croghan,  52 
n.,  59  n. ;  from  Baynton,  Whar- 
ton  and  Morgan,  55  n.;   from 
Forbes,    64  n.,  93  n.,  96  n.; 
from  Wilkins,  64  n.,  96  n.,  98 
n.,  I55n.,  I56n.;  from  Conway, 
780.;  f rom Taylor,  99 n.;  from 
Shelburne,  lion.,  126  n.,  127 
n.,   131  n.;   from   Haldimand, 

143  n.,   156  n.,   157  n.;   from 
Pownall,   147  n.;    from   Dart- 
mouth, 153  n.,  154  n.,  155  n., 
157  n.,   161  n.;   from  Sowers, 
155  n.;  from  Lord,  157  n.,  160 
n.,  161  n.;  takes  command. of 
British   army  in  America,  31; 
opinion  of,  concerning  French 
officials,  33,  34;    issues  instruc- 
tions  to    Fraser,    40;   supplies 
sent  to  Illinois  by,   54;  letters 
of  (Harvard  College),  cited,  54 
n.,   58  n.,  59  n.,  64  n.,  73  n., 
74  n.,  93  n.,  95  n.,  156  n.,  157 
n.;  Croghan  sent  to  Illinois  by, 
58;  extent  of  authority  of,  in 
Indian  affairs,  58  n  ;   fears  In- 
dian outbreak,    64  n.;   knowl- 
edge   of,    concerning    judicial 


212 


INDEX 


court  in  Illinois,  66-67;  opinion 
of,  concerning  sale  of  church 
property  in  Illinois,  75  n.;  opin- 
ion of,  concerning  England's 
object  in  West,  78  n.;  attempts 
of,  to  protect  trade  in  Illinois, 
87  n.,  89,  91,  92,  93,  96,  99; 
statement  of,  concerning  com- 
petition between  French  and 
English  in  Illinois,  90;  plans 
of,  for  attack  upon  New  Or- 
leans, loo-ioi,  144;  statement 
of,  concerning  expenses  of  mili- 
tary department,  102  n.;  part 
taken  by,  in  efforts  to  establish 
Illinois  colony,  113-114,  115, 
118,  127  n.,  129  n.,  136,  139 
n.,  141-142;  instructions  to, 
respecting  attack  upon  Louisi- 
ana, 143;  Bloiiin  sent  to,  as 
representative  of  Illinois  French, 
146-147;  attitude  of,  towards 
civil  government  for  Illinois, 
148-153,  158;  annuls  land 
grants  in  Illinois,  160-161 

Galloway,  Joseph,  69  n.,  115,  116 
n.,  117,  123  n. 

Gayarre,  C.  E.,  Louisiana,  cited, 
33  n.  See  also  Bibliography 

Gentry,  description  of,  8-9 

George  III,  4 

Georgia,  colony  of,  135 

Germany,  no 

Gibault,  Father  Pierre,  76 

Girardot,  Pierre,  68,  147  n. 

Gordon,  Capt.  Harry,  59  n.;  let- 
ter from,  to  Johnson,  34  n.; 
"Notes  on  the  Country  along 
the  Mississippi  from  Kaskaskia 
in  the  Illinois  to  New  Orleans", 
cited,  99  n. ;  "Journal  down 
the  Ohio,  1766",  cited,  87  n., 
97  n.,  98  n.,  99  n. 

Government.  See  Civil  Govern- 
ment 

Graf  ton,  ,  133 

Great  Britain,  47,  66,  84,  85,  87, 
95  n.,  96,  97,  101,  102,  104, 
107,  122  n.,  126  n.,  132,  135, 
142,  163;  problem  confronting, 


in  1763,  i;  Canada  ceded  to, 
by  France,  5;  receives  title  to 
Illinois  region,  27;  inhabitants 
of  Illinois  guaranteed  rights  of 
subjects  of,  47;  Indians  profess 
allegiance  to,  55;  opinions  con- 
cerning advantages  to,  by  estab- 
lishment of  Illinois  colony,  96— 
97,  1 1 8.  See  also  England,  and 
items  under  British  army,  British 
government,  etc. 

Green  Bay,  27 

Grenada,  province  of,  14,  25 

Grenville  ministry,  15 

Grenville  Papers,  cited,  133  n., 
134  n. 

Haldimand,  Gen.,  99,  100,  142, 
143  n.;  letters  from,  to  Gage, 
143  n.,  156  n.,  157  n.;  to  Dart- 
mouth, 157  n.,  161  n.;  to  Lord, 
159  n.;  to  Johnson,  161  n.; 
takes  command  of  the  Amer- 
ican army,  149  n.;  plan  for 
civil  government  for  Illinois 
submitted  to,  I5on.;  report  to, 
concerning  attitude  of  the  Illi- 
nois French,  159 

Haldimand  Papers  (British  Mu- 
seum), cited,  148  n.,  149  n., 
152  n.,  153  n.,  161  n. 

Halifax,  Lord,  15,  79,  112;  let- 
ters to,  from  Gage,  31  n.,  32 
n.,  34  n.,  35  n.,  37  n.,  98  n. 

Hamilton,  Maj.  Isaac,  letters 
from,  to  Gage,  146  n.,  151  n.; 
to  Stuart,  157  n.;  acting  com- 
mandant in  Illinois,  148,  156; 
circulates  among  Illinois  French 
a  plan  of  government,  149;  ad- 
dresses inhabitants  of  Illinois 
relative  to  a  civil  government, 

IS' 

Hamilton,  P.  J.,  Colonial  Mobile, 
cited,  143  n.  See  also  Bibliog- 
raphy 

Harding,  Julia  Morgan,  "Biog- 
raphy of  Col.  George  Morgan  ", 
cited,  68  n.  See  also  Bibliog- 
raphy 


INDEX 


213 


Havana,  5 

Hay,  Maj.  John,  sent  on  mission 
to  the  Illinois  country,  162  n. 

Hazard,  Samuel,  outlines  proposal 
for  western  colony,  103-104 

Hillsborough,  Lord,  21,  24,  99, 
109  n.,  140,  144,  151,  153; 
president  of  Board  of  Trade, 
15;  author  of  plan  of  1764,  16, 
56,  80;  interest  of,  in  West, 
17;  letters  from,  to  Gage,  21 
n.,  23  n.,  64  n.,  67  n.,  73  n., 
97  n.,  99  n.,  100  n.,  101  n., 
134  n.,  135  n.,  139  n.,  142  n., 
148  n.,  154  n.,  156  n.,  i6on.; 
to  Johnson,  73  n.,  74  n.,  102 
n.;  to  Carleton,  89  n.;  letters 
to,  from  Gage,  21  n.,  58  n.,  61 
n.,  62  n.,  64  n.,  67  n.,  73  n., 
74  n.,  78  n.,  83  n.,  87  n.,  88 
n. ,  89  n.,  90  n.,  92  n.,  93  n., 
95  n.,  97  n.,  98  n.,  99  n.,  101 
n.,  127  n.,  139  n.,  143  n.,  144 
n.,  146  n.,  148  n.,  149  n.,  156 
n.,  157  n.;  from  Johnson,  64 
n.,  73  n.,  85  n.,  86  n.,  89  n., 
102  n.;  attitude  of,  towards 
Illinois  French,  62  n.;  fears 
Indian  outbreak,  63  n  ;  knowl- 
edge of,  concerning  court  of 
judicature,  67;  views  of,  re- 
specting value  of  West  to  Eng- 
land, 96-97,  100;  orders  of, 
for  conquest  of  Louisiana,  101, 
143;  attempt  of,  to  regulate 
trade,  102  n.;  attitude  of,  on 
colonial  project,  132  n.,  133, 
134>  13$-137>  138,  139  n.,  140 
n.,  142,  144,  148  n.;  becomes 
secretary  of  state  for  colonies, 
134;  interpretation  placed  on 
proclamation  of  1763  by,  140— 
141;  effect  of  restrictive  policy 
of,  145;  expresses  concern  over 
status  of  western  settlements, 

154 

Hinsdale,  B.  A.,  "The  Estab- 
lishment of  the  First  Southern 
Boundary  of  the  United  States  ", 
cited,  124  n.;  The  Old  North- 


west, cited,  140  n.;  "The 
Western  Land  Policy  of  the 
British  Government  from  1763 
to  1775",  cited,  140  n.  See 
also  Bibliography 

Historical  Magazine,  cited,  64  n., 
6511.,  66  n.,  68  n.,  70  n.,  72 
n.,73n.  See  also  Bibliography 

Holy  Family,  parish  of,  at  Ca- 
hokia,  II 

Home,  Capt.,  letter  from,  to  Hal- 
dimand,  99  n. 

Hughes,  John,  116  n.;  enters 
company  for  purchase  of  land 
in  Illinois  country,  115 

Huron,  Lake,  109 

Hutchins,  Thomas,  A  Topograph- 
ical Description,  cited,  3  n.; 
letters  from,  to  Johnson,  43  n.; 
to  Haldimand,  100  n.;  accom- 
panies Croghan  to  Illinois,  59 
n.;  "Remarks  upon  the  Coun- 
try of  the  Illinois",  cited,  88 
n.,  94  n.,  95  n.,  98  n.,  99  n. 
See  also  Bibliography 

Iberville,  d'  (Lemoine  or  Le- 
moyne),  3 

Iberville  River,  99 

Illinois  Land  Company,  1 60, 161  n. 

Illinois  River,  5,  6,  23  n.,  87,  88, 
93»  97)  98  n.,  99,  100,  109  n., 
no,  in,  139,  160 

Immaculate  Conception,  parish 
of,  n 

India,  2,  4 

Indian  affairs,  plan  for  manage- 
ment of,  16,  19,  77,  80,  81, 
102;  commissary  of,  56-57,  80; 
superintendents  of,  56,  57,  79, 
80,  1 19  n.  See  also  Johnson, 
Sir  William 

Indian  country,  14,  19.  See  also 
West 

Indians,  8,  12,  21  n.,  31,  39  n., 
41,  48  n.,  53,  62  n.,  82,  85,  87 
n.,  89  n.,  90,  97,  101,  102, 
104,  io6n.,  107,  io8n.,  112 
n.,  113,  114,  118,  119,  126  n., 
131,  132,  135,  139,  153  n., 


2I4 


INDEX 


157;  provisions  for  regulation 
of  trade  with,  15  n.,  16,  8c-8l, 
IO2  n.,  138;  lands  reserved  for 
use  of,  16,  79,  108,  139;  influ- 
ence of  Spanish  over,  23,  6 1 ; 
influence  of  French  over,  23, 
30,  41,  61,  78,  84;  causes  of 
revolt  of,  in  1762,  28-29;  pres- 
ents to,  29,  32,  34,  39  n.,  51, 
52  n.,  54,  58,  85;  attitude 
of,  towards  English,  30,  32, 
3S»  36,  37.  40,  4i-43»  44. 
45  n.,  52,  ss,  60,  61-63,  73- 
74;  attack  expedition  of  Maj. 
Loftus,  34;  Croghan  sent  to 
conciliate  western,  38;  goods 
designed  for,  destroyed,  39; 
employed  to  carry  supplies  to 
Fort  de  Chartres,  54;  incited 
by  French,  55-56,  88-89;  plan 
for  government  of,  56;  Croghan 
sent  on  mission  to,  58;  general 
peace  with,  concluded,  59;  civil 
war  among,  74;  history  of  Eng- 
lish management  of,  78-80; 
expectations  concerning  trade 
with,  in  Illinois  country,  82; 
contrast  between  English  and 
French  methods  of  dealing  with, 
85-86;  expense  of  management 
of,  in  Illinois  country,  95; 
plans  to  purchase  lands  from, 
in  Illinois  country,  III,  119, 
160;  Illinois,  5,  45  n.,  61,  62 
n.,  87;  Iroquois,  27;  Algon- 
quin, 28,  29;  Delaware,  30, 
3,1  •  3S»  39.  59.  62,  73  n.; 
Shawnee,  30,  31,  35,  39,  40  n., 
41,  42,  44,  59,  62,  73  n.;  Ton- 
ka, 32;  Chickasaw,  34  n.,  37; 
Cherokee,  34  n.,  42  n.,  87  n.; 
Choctaw,  37;  Osage,  38;  Mis- 
souri, 38,  62  n.;  Seneca,  40 
n.;  Mascoutin,  42;  Kickapoo, 
42,63;  Chippewa,  63;  Ottawa, 
63;  Pottawottomi,  63 
Indies,  Company  of,  6,  8 
Intendant  of  Louisiana,  civil  offi- 
cials of  Illinois  responsible  to, 
10 


"Invitation  Serieuse  aux  Habi- 
tants des  Illinois  ",  contents  of, 
152-153;  relation  of,  to  strug- 
gle for  civil  government,  152. 
See  also  Bibliography 

Jackson,  Richard,  recommends 
establishment  of  colony  in  Illi- 
nois country,  125  n.,'  127; 
counsel  to  Board  of  Trade, 
127  n. 

Jamaica,  25  n. 

Jennings,  John,  Journal  of,  cited, 
63  n.  See  also  Bibliography 

Jesuit  Relations  (ed.  Thwaites), 
cited,  60  n.,  75  n.,  76  n.  See 
also  Bibliography 

Jesuits,  11;  property  of,  in  Illi- 
nois confiscated,  75 

Johnson,  Guy,  letter  from,  to  Hal- 
dimand,  161  n. 

Johnson  Manuscripts  (New  York 
State  Library),  cited,  19  n., 
20  n.,  30  n.,  37  n.,  38  n.,  39 
n.,  41  n.,  43  n.,  45  n.,  52  n., 
55  n.,  57  n.,  58  n.,  59  n.,  60 
n.,  61  n.,  63  n.,  73  n.,  74  n., 
82  n.,  91  n.,  92  n.,  93  n.,  96 
n.,  97  n.,  98  n.,  101  n.,  105 
n.,  Hi  n.,  112  n.,  n6n.,  119 
n.,  122  n.,  123  n.,  141  n.,  157 
n.,  161  n.  See  also  Bibliog- 
raphy 

Johnson,  Sir  William,  15  n.,  19, 
24,  30,  38  n.,  40  n.,  45  n.,  48 
n.,  58,  64  n.,  67,  92,  99,  112 
n.,  116  n.,  iign.,  I22n.,  123, 
124  n.,  127  n.,  141;  letters  to, 
from  Gage,  19  n.,  40  n.,  41  n., 
45  n.,  54  n.,  57  n.,  58  n.,  59 
n.,  61  n.,  64  n.,  73  n.,  74  n., 
91  n.,  92  n.,  93  n.,  95  n.,  96 
n.,  97  n.,  98  n.,  156  n.,  157 
n.;  from  Phyn,  20  n.,  87  n., 
91  n.,  93  n.,  98  n.,  101  n.; 
from  Gordon,  37  n.;  from 
Shuckburgh,  41  n.;  from  Hut- 
chins,  43  n.;  from  Macdonald, 
43  n.;  from  Campbell,  51  n.; 
from  Cole,  57  n.,  59  n.,  6l  n., 


INDEX 


215 


74  n.;    from   Croghan,  58  n., 
59  n.,  60  n.,  in  n.,  112  n., 
116  n.,  1 19  n.,  121  n.,  122  n.; 
from   Hillsborough,  73  n.,   74 
n.,    102    n.;     from    Lords    of 
Trade,  86  n.:    from   Carleton, 
92  n.;  from  Baynton,  Wharton 
and  Morgan,   105  n.,   121   n., 
123  n.;  from  W.  Franklin,  122 
n.;    from  B.  Franklin,  122  n., 
123  n.;   from  Dartmouth,  157 
n.;   from  Haldimand,  161  n.; 
declaration  of,  concerning  gov- 
ernment in  West,  20;  "Peview 
of  the  Trade  and  Affairs  of  the 
Indians  in  the  Northern  District 
of  America",  cited,  20  n.,  85 
n.,  86  n.,  98  n.;   letters   from, 
to  Amherst,  28  n.,  29  n.,  30 
n.;   to  Lords  of  Trade,  28  n., 
30  n.,  38  n.,  39  n.,  41  n.,  43 
n.,  45  n.,  51  n.,   55  n.,    57  n., 
59  n.,  61  n.,  79  n.,  85  n.,  86 
n.,  128  n.;    to  Golden,   30  n.; 
to  Gage,  38  n.,  61  n.,  73  n., 
91  n.,  92  n.;  to  Croghan,  45 
n.,  58  n.,  Ii2n.;  to  Shelburhe, 
55  n.,  56  n.,  58  n.,  59  n.,  61 
n.,  85  n.;   to   Hillsborough,  64 
n.,  73  n.,  85  n.,  86  n.,  89  n., 
102   n.;    to    Penn,    82   n.;    to 
Carleton,  85  n.,  88  n.;  to  Bayn- 
ton, Wharton  and  Morgan,  121 
n.,  122  n.;  to  B.  Franklin,  121 
n.,    122  n.;    to    W.    Franklin, 
121  n.,  122  n.,  I27n.;  to  Con- 
way,   122  n.;    to    Haldimand, 
161  n.;  instructions  of,  to  Cro- 
ghan, 38,  i  n  n.,  1 12  n  ;  neglect 
of  Indian  affairs  by,  57;  extent 
of  authority  of,  in  Indian  affairs, 
58  n . ;  connection  of,  with  colo- 
nial project,   112,  115,  119  n., 
1 21-122;   suggested    as  gover- 
nor of  proposed  Illinois  colony, 
119  n. 

Johnstone,  Gov.,  51  n- 

Journal  of  the  Association  of  En- 
gineering Societies,  cited,  119 
n.  See  also  Bibliography 


Judge.     See  French  officials 
Jury,  trial  by,  70 
Justices  of  the  peace,  16 

Kaskaskia,  9,  69,  97,  146,  156, 
158  n.,  1 60;  mission  estab- 
lished at,  5;  population  of,  7; 
character  of  land  holdings  at, 
10;  parish  at,  n;  troops  de- 
signed for,  32;  Capt.  Ster- 
ling confronted  with  opposition 
at,  47-49;  French  cross  river 
at,  53;  meetings  of  court  of 
judicature  at,  71  n.;  contro- 
versy over  holding  court  at,  71? 
Jesuits  at,  75:  Father  Gibault 
takes  up  residence  at,  76;  de- 
signed as  center  of  government 
for  Illinois,  162 

Kaskaskia  Records  (British  Pe- 
riod), cited,  67  n.,  69  n.,  70  n., 
147  n.,  150  n.,  156  n.,  1570. 
See  also  Bibliography 

Kaunitz,  2 

Kentucky,  state  of,  106 

Kerlerec,  Gov.,  letters  to,  from 
Neyon,  31  n. 

Kickapoo  Indians.  See  Indians, 
Kickapoo 

King's  attorney.  See  French 
officials 

Kingsford,  William,  History  of 
Canada,  cited,  27  n.,  28  n., 
31  n.,  32  n.,  33  n.,  36  n.,  40 
n.,  42  n.  See  also  Bibliography 

Knox,  William,  Justice  and  Policy 
of  the  Quebec  Act,  cited,  22  n., 
8l  n.  See  also  Bibliography 

Labuxiere,  Joseph,  49 

Lachance,  family  of,  9 

Laclede, ,  87 

LaCroix,  J.  B.  H.,  9 

La  Grange,  M. ,  signs  petition  of 
inhabitants  of  Illinois,  49  n.; 
appointed  judge,  50 

Langlois,  family  of,  II 

Lansdowne  MSS. ,  cited,  91  n., 
93  n.,  97  n.,  98' n.,  108  n., 
127  n.,  131  n.,  136  n.,  140  n., 
142  n.  See  also  Bibliography 


2l6 


INDEX 


La  Salle,  M.  de,  3,  5 

Lead -mining,  important  industry 

in  Illinois  country,  120  n. 
Lee,  Arthur,  105,  109  n.,  128 
Lee,    Charles,    109   n.;    outlines 

plan  for  colonies  in  West,  109- 

IIO 

Lee,  Francis  Lightfoot,  105 

Lee,  Richard  Henry,  105 

Lee,  Thomas,  105 

Lee,  William,  105;  letter  to, 
from  Mississippi  Land  Com- 
pany, 109  n. 

Lee  Papers  (N.  Y.  Hist.  Soc. 
Colls.,  Fund  series),  cited,  109 
n.,  no  n.  See  also  Bibliog- 
raphy 

Lefebvre,  Joseph,  49 

L'Esperance,  Joseph,  71 

Leulhen,  battle  of,  4 

Lincoln,  C.  H. ,  Calendar  ofMSS. 
of  Sir  William  Johnson  in 
American  Antiquarian  Society 
Library,  cited,  121  n.,  122  n. 
See  also  Bibliography 

Loftus,  Maj.  Arthur,  attempts  to 
reach  Illinois,  32;  attacked  by 
Indians,  32-33;  letters  from, 
to  Gage,  32  n.,  33  n.,  34  n.; 
defeat  of,  33,  34,  35,  37 

London,  49  n.,  52  n.,  54  n.,  83, 
91,  103,  io6n.,  116,  124,  128, 
132,  149  n.,  160  n. 

Lord,  Capt.  Hugh,  162  n.;  letters 
from,  to  Stuart,  151  n.;  to 
Gage,  157  n.,  160  n.,  161  n.; 
to  Haldimand,  161  n.;  com- 
mandant in  Illinois,  156;  policy 
of  conciliation  adopted  by,  157; 
report  of,  concerning  attitude 
of  Illinois  French,  159;  letters 
to,  from  Haldimand,  159  n., 
161  n. 

Lords,  House  of,  22,  95  n. 

Lords  of  Trade,  letters  to,  from 
Johnson,  28  n.,  30  n.,  38  n., 
39  n.,  41  n.,  42  n.,  43  n.,  45 
n.,  51  n.,  56  n.,  57  n.,  59  n., 
6l  n.,  79  n.,  85  n.,  86  n.,  128 
n.;  from  Shelburne,  103  n., 


127  n.,  129  n.;  representation 
of,  on  Indian  affairs,  cited,  57 
n.,  81  n.,  129  n.,  132  n.,  134 
n.,  137  n.;  letters  from,  to 
Johnson,  86  n. 

Louis  XIV,  I 

Louisburg,  3 

Louisiana,  22,  32,  93,  142;  Illi- 
nois country  annexed  to,  6,  9; 
becomes  a  royal  province,  7; 
economic  relations  of,  with  Illi- 
nois country,  n;  effect  on  In- 
dians of  transfer  of,  to  Spain, 
41;  Illinois  and  Wabash  settle- 
ments in  jurisdiction  of,  47;  in- 
habitants of  Illinois  migrate  to, 
47»  53?  traders  from,  6l,  87, 
89;  plans  for  conquest  of,  100- 
101,  119,  141-144 

Louviere,  M.,  69 

Lyman,  Gen.  Phineas,  124,  125 
n.,  128 

Macdonald,  James,  letter  from,  to 

Johnson,  43  n. 
Mackinac,  occupation  of,  27 
Macleane,    L. ,    letters    to,    from 

Baynton,    Wharton   and    Mor- 
gan, 83  n.,  95  n. 
McMillan,  James,  68 
Magazine  of  American  History, 

VIII,    cited,    36   n.     See  also 

Bibliography 
Magellan,  strait  of,  143 
Maissonville,  40  n.,  41  n.,  43 
Manchac,  83,  98  n. 
Mansfield,  Lord,  25 
Margry,   P.,  Decouvertes,    cited, 

6n. 

Maria  Theresa,  2 
Marsh,    Capt.,    letters    from,   to 

Haldimand,  95  n.,  143  n. 
Maryland,  98  n.,  105,  109  n. 
Mascoutin  Indians.     See  Indians, 

Mascoutin 
Mason,  Edward  G.,  Chapters  from 

Illinois  History,  cited,  58  n., 

147  n.,  149  n.,  159  n.     See  also 

Bibliography 
Maturin,     G.,    letter     from,     to 


INDEX 


217 


Baynton,  Wharton  and  Mor- 
gan, 74  n. 

Maurepas,  Lake,  99 

Memorial  of  the  inhabitants  of 
Illinois  to  Gage,  48,  53  n. 

Mercer,  Col.  George,  128 

Meurin,  Father,  75,  76  n.;  letters 
from,  to  Bishop  Briand,  60  n., 

75  "• 

Mexico,  126 

Mexico,  gulf  of,  3,  no,  126 

Michigan,  Lake,  3 

Michigan  Pioneer  and  Historical 
Collections,  cited,  14  n.,  40  n., 
41  n.,  79  n.,  92  n.,  140  n., 
161  n.  See  also  Bibliography 

Michilimakinac,  153  n. 

Mines,  regulations  proposed  for, 
1 20 

Ministry,  the.     S?e  British  ministry 

Misere.     See  St.  Genevieve 

Mississippi  Land  Company,  no, 
128,  130  n.;  organization  and 
history  of,  105-109;  letters 
from,  to  Gumming,  106  n. 

Mississippi  River,  6,  20  n.,  22, 
23,  27,  29,  31,  38,  40,  42,  44, 
45,  47,  54,  77,  83,  84,  86,  98, 
101,  104,  107,  109  n.,  no,  in, 
118,  120  n.,  126,  139,  141, 
143  n.,  144,  146,  152,  160  n.; 
Illinois  villages  situated  on,  3; 
navigation  of,  declared  open, 
5,  32;  attitude  of  Indians  in 
region  of,  34,  61 ;  attempts  to 
regulate  trade  on,  82,  87-88, 

90,  91.  92,  93,  94,  97,  99, 
142;  plans  to  establish  a  colony 
on,  106,  117,  124;  threatens 
Fort  Chartres,  156 

Missouri  Indians.  See  Indians, 
Missouri 

Missouri  River,  87 

Mobile,  20  n.,  33,  37,  51,  54  n., 
55,  144;  command  of  Gulf  of 
Mexico  given  to  French  by,  3; 
occupied  by  English  troops,  32 

Monette,  J.  W.,  History  of  the 
Mississippi  Valley,  I,  cited,  50 
n.  See  also  Bibliography 


Montreal,  4 

Morgan,  George,  69,  82,  87  n., 
91  n.,  1 16  n.;  goes  to  Illinois, 
59  n.;  letters  from,  to  his  wife, 
59  n.;  to  Alexander  William- 
son, 60  n.;  to  Baynton  and 
Wharton,  60  n.,  62  n.,  64  n., 
65  n.,  73  n.,  87  n.,  88  n.,  89 
n.,  90  n.,  95  n.,  97  n.,  98  n., 
99  n.;  to  John  Baynton,  73  n.; 
statement  of,  concerning  trade 
in  Illinois,  60  n.;  letter  book 
of,  cited,  60  n.,  61  n.,  62  n., 
64  n.,  73  n.,  83  n.,  87  n.,  88 
n.,  89  n.,  90  n.,  91  n.,  94  n., 
98  n.,  99  n.;  part  taken  by, 
towards  establishment  of  a  civil 
government  in  Illinois,  6l  n.; 
sketch  of  life  of,  68;  heads 
party  faction,  71;  involved  in 
court  of  inquiry,  72;  sugges- 
tions of,  concerning  regulation 
of  trade,  95,  98  n.;  leaves  Illi- 
nois, 146  n.  See  also  Baynton, 
Wharton  and  Morgan;  Bibliog- 
raphy 

Morris,  Capt.  Thomas,  attempts 
to  reach  Illinois,  36;  journal  of, 
36  n.;  escapes  from  Indians,  37 

Moses,  John,  70  n.;  "Court  of 
Enquiry  at  Ft.  Chartres",  cited, 
58  n.,  64  n.,  66  n.,  70  n.;  Illi- 
nois, Historical  and  Statistical, 
cited,  58  n.,  66  n.,  70  n.  See 
also  Bibliography 

Munro,  W.  B.,  The  Seigniorial 
System  in  Canada,  cited,  9  n. 
See  also  Bibliography 

Murray, ,  letters  to,  from 

Croghan,  42  n.,  43  n. 

Murray,  William,  160 

Mutiny  and  desertion,  act  for  pun- 
ishing, 19  n. 

Myers  Collection  (New  York  Pub- 
lic Library),  41  n. 

Narrative  of  the  Transactions, 
Imprisonment  and  Sufferings 
of  John  Connolly,  an  Amer- 
ican Loyalist,  cited,  163  n. 


2l8 


INDEX 


New  England,  1 10 

New  Jersey,  in,  115 

New  Orleans,  2,  3,  12,  31,  33, 
36,38,40,  54,  87  n.,  91  n.,  99, 
1 1 8;  ceded  to  Spain,  5;  expe- 
dition organized  at,  to  take 
possession  of  Illinois,  32;  Pon- 
tiac  seeks  aid  from,  37,  41; 
provisions  sent  to  Illinois  from, 
55;  commercial  connection  of, 
with  Illinois,  82,  86  n.,  90,  91, 
92.  93»  94-95  96  n.,  97;  plans 
for  attack  upon,  100-101,  141- 
144 

New  York,  city  of,  17,  52  n.,  54, 

86  n.,  101,  143,  146,  147  n., 
149  n.,   150  n.,   152,   159  n.; 
colony  of,  105,  III 

New  York  Colonial  Documents. 
See  Documents  relating  to  the 
Colonial  History  of  the  Slate 
of  New  York 

Niagara,  3,  27,  29 

North,  Lord,  22,  24 

North  America.     See  America 

Notary.     See  French  officials 

Notes,  issuance  of,  54  n. 

Nouvelle  Chartres,  7,  IO,  1 1 

Nova  Scotia,  135 

Observer,  Washington  (Pa.),  cited, 
68  n.  See  also  Bibliography 

Ogg,  F.  A.,  Opening  of  the  Mis- 
sissippi, cited,  32  n.,  38  n.  See 
also  Bibliography 

Ohio  Arch,  and  Hist.  Quarterly, 
cited,  105  n.,  140  n.  See  also 
Bibliography 

Ohio  Company,  103,  in  n.,  128 

Ohio  Company  Papers,  cited,  1 1 9  n. 

Ohio  River,  20  n.,  22,  26,  31,  32, 
37,  56,  59  n.,  62,  77,  80,  84, 

87  n.,  91,  93,  101,  102  n.,  103, 
104,  106,  109 n.,  in,  112,  114, 
130  n.,  137,  139,  141,  160  n.; 
proposal  to  guard,  by  mainte- 
nance of  Illinois   posts,  23  n.; 
preparations     made     to     send 
troops  down,  35,  38;   journey 
of  Capt.  Sterling  down,  44;  In- 


dian depredations  along,  63; 
attempts  to  regulate  trade  on, 
82,  87,  90,  98;  plans  to  plant 
colony  on,  no,  129,  144 

O'Reilly,  Gov.,  89,  143  n. 

Osage  Indians.  See  Indians, 
Osage 

Ottawa  Indians.  See  Indians, 
Ottawa 

Ouiatanon,  6n.,  27,  42,  43,  45  n. 

Pacific  Ocean,  5 

Paris,  127  n.;  treaty  of,  I,  13, 
27,  48  n.,  75,  101,  155;  terms 
of,  effecting  Illinois  country,  5, 
17,  46-47, 48;  Mississippi  River 
declared  open  by,  31;  defines 
legal  position  of  Roman  Cath- 
olic church  in  West,  47;  influ- 
ence of,  on  colonizing  spirit,  104 

Parish  priest,  duties  of,  9-10 

Parishes  of  Illinois,  II 

Parkman  Collection  (Mass.  Hist. 
Soc. ),  cited,  39  n.,  40  n.,  51 
n.,  57  n.,  58  n.  See  also  Bib- 
liography 

Parkman,  Francis,  La  Salle  and 
the  Discovery  of  the  Great 
West,  cited,  5  n.;  Montcalm 
and  Wolfe*  cited,  6  n.;  Con- 
spiracy of  Pontiac,  cited,  27  n., 
28  n.,  29  n.,  31  n.,  32  n.,  33 
n.,  36  n.,  38  n.,  39  n.,  40  n., 
42  n.,  45  n.,  85  n.  See  also 
Bibliography 

Parliament,  25  n.,  26,  57,  66,  95 
n.,  102,  133 

Parliamentary  History,  cited,  22 
n.,  78  n.,  95  n.  See  also  Bib- 
liography 

Parrish,  Randall,  Historic  Illi- 
nois, cited,  58  n.,  147  n.,  149 
n.,  159  n.;  statements  of,  rela- 
tive to  struggle  for  civil  govern- 
ment in  Illinois,  147  n.,  149  n., 
159  n.  See  also  Bibliography 

Party  factions,  71,  72 

Penn,  Gov.,  letter  to,  from  John- 
son, 82  n. 

Pennsylvania,  39,  91,  98  n.,  105, 


INDEX 


219 


115,  116,  118;  settlers  from, 
in  Ohio  valley,  3;  residents  of, 
interested  in  colonial  plan  of 
1766,  in;  Indian  troubles  on 
frontier  of,  157  n. 

Pennsylvania  Archives,  cited, 
108  n. 

Pennsylvania  Packet  and  Gen- 
eral Advertiser,  cited,  73  n. 
See  also  Bibliography 

Pennsylvania  State  Library,  Divi- 
sion of  Public  Records,  cited, 
65  n.,  72  n.,  73  n.,  74  n.,  83 
n.,  97  n.  See  also  Bibliography 

Pensacola,  32,  143 

Peoria,  5 

Perkins,  James  B.,  France  under 
Louis  XV,  cited,  2  n.  See  also 
Bibliography 

Peyton,  J.  L.,  History  of  Augusta 
Co.,  Va.,  cited,  140  n.  See 
also  Bibliography 

Philadelphia,  19  n.,  39,  64  n.,  83, 
104,  116,  1190.,  120  n.,  152, 
161  n. 

Phyn,  Lieut.  George,  92,  141;  let- 
ters from,  to  Johnson,  20  n., 
87  n.,  91  n.,  93  n.,  98  n., 
101  n.,  141  n. 

Pittman,  Capt.  Philip,  71;  The 
Present  State  of  the  European 
Settlements  on  the  Mississippi, 
cited,  3  n.,  7  n.,  9  n.,  II  n., 
53  n.,  71  n.,  99  n.  See  also 
Bibliography 

Plain  Facts,  cited,  109  n.  See 
also  Bibliography 

Political  Essays  concerning  the 
Present  State  of  the  British 
Empire,  cited,  i6on.  See  also 
Bibliography 

Pontchartrain,  Lake,  99 

Pontiac,  34,  41,  84;  motive  of, 
in. leading  revolt,  29;  assistance 
given  to,  by  French  intriguers, 
30;  effect  of  Loftus'  defeat  on, 
35-36;  influences  Missouri  and 
Osage  Indians,  38;  saves  Lieut. 
Fraser's  life,  40;  makes  peace 
with  English,  43;  murder  of,  74 

Poole,    William,    "The  West", 


cited,  27  n.  See  also  Bibliog- 
raphy 

Pottawottomi  Indians.  See  In- 
dians, Pottawottomi 

Pownall,  John,  letter  to,  from 
Gage,  147  n.;  letter  from,  to 
Gage,  147  n. 

Pownall,  Thomas,  140  n.;  Admin- 
istration of  the  Colonies,  cited, 
6  n.,  28  n.,  29  n.,  83  n.  See 
also  Bibliography 

Prairie  du  Rocher,  7,  9,  II,  49 

Pratz,  Le  Page  du,  Histoire  de  la 
Louisiane,  cited,  7  n.,  8  n.,  15 
n.  See  also  Bibliography 

Privy  Council  Office,  Unbound 
Papers,  cited,  106  n.  See  also 
Bibliography 

Proclamation  of  1763,  56,  108, 
in,  135,  161;  issuance  of,  14; 
purpose  of  authors  of,  16;  com- 
ment in  Annual  Register  on, 
21 ;  no  provision  for  West  in, 
23,  25;  trade  regulations  of, 
77,  79;  influence  of,  on  Board 
of  Trade,  139-141 ;  violated  by 
land  companies,  144,  160 

Prussia,  2 

Public  Record  Office,  series  Amer- 
ica and  West  Indies,  cited,  19 
n.,  20  n.,  21  n.,  23  n.,  44  n., 
45  n.,  48  n.,  49  n.,  50  n.,  51 
n.,  52  n.,  53  n.,  54  n.,  55  n., 
56  n.,  58  n.,  6l  n.,  62  n.,  63 
n.,  64  n.,  67  n.,  73  n.,  74  n., 
75  n.,  76  n.,  78  n.,  83  n.,  87 
n.,  88  n.,  89  n.,  90  n.,  91  n., 
92  n.,  93  n.,  95  n.,  96  n.,  97 
n.,  98  n.,  99  n.,  100  n.  101 
121  n.,  125  n.  126 
134  n.,  135  n.  138 
142  n.,  143  n.  144 
147  n.,  148  n.  149 
152  n.,  153  n.  154 
I57n.,  158  n.  159 
n.,  161  n.;  Home  Office  Papers, 
cited,  38  n.,  51  n.;  Declared 
Accounts,  cited,  95  n.;  Colonial 
Office  Papers,  cited,  I28n.  See 
also  Bibliography  ;  Chatham 
Papers. 


n., 

no  n. 

n., 

127  n. 

n., 
n., 

139  n. 
146  n. 

n., 
n., 

151  n. 
156  n. 

22O 


INDEX 


Publications  of  Club  for  Colonial 
Reprints,  cited,  152  n. 

Quebec,  4,  5,  6  n.,  n,   14,  23, 

75,  93 

Quebec  Act,  23  n.,  24,  25  n.; 
provisions  of,  relating  to  West, 
22,  26;  passage  of,  162 

"  Reasons  for  the  Establishment 
of  a  Colony  in  Illinois,  1766  ", 
cited,  101  n.,  117  n.  See  also 
Documentary  Appendix 

Recollect  fathers,  1 1 

Reed,  Lieut. -Col.  John,  54  n.,  57 
n.,  59,  64;  commands  Fort  de 
Chartres,  55,  60;  recalled,  61 

Regnault,  family  of,  II 

Revenue  Act  of  1767,  133 

Reynolds,  John,  The  Pioneer  His- 
tory of  Illinois,  cited,  51  n. 
See  also  Bibliography 

Robertson,  Lieut. -Col.,  letters 
from,  to  Gage,  32  n.,  33  n. 

Rocheblave,  M.  de,  49  n.;  rep- 
resents English  government  in 
Illinois,  163 

Rockingham  Memoirs,  cited,  134 
n.  See  also  Bibliography 

Rockingham  ministry,  displace- 
ment of,  123 

Rogers,  Maj.  Robert,  proposes 
civil  government  for  Michili- 
makinac,  153  n.;  journal  of, 
cited,  153  n. 

Roman  Catholic  church,  rights  of, 
defined  in  treaty  of  Paris,  46- 
47;  Wilkins'  relations  with 
members  of,  74;  sketch  of, 
during  British  period,  75-76 

Ross,  Lieut.  John,  letteis  from,  to 
Farmer,  37  n.,  38  n.;  attempt 
of,  to  conciliate  Indians  in  Illi- 
nois, 37-38;  departure  of,  from 
Illinois,  40 

Rossbach,  battle  of,  4 

Royal  Historical  Manuscripts 
Commission,  Fifth,  Report, 
cited,  59  n.,  124  n.,  127  n., 
129  n.  See  also  Bibliography 


Royal  Historical  Manuscripts 
Commission,  fourteenth  Re- 
port, cited,  56  n.,  62  n.,  64  n., 
73  n.,  89  n.,  98  n.,  147  n.,  156 
n.  See  also  Bibliography 

Royal  warehouse,  keeper  of.  See 
French  officials 

Rumsey,  Lieut.  James,  68,  69  n., 
11911.;  sent  to  Fort  de  Char- 
tres, 44-45;  made  royal  com- 
missary under  British,  50;  ap- 
pointed to  forward  petition  for 
civil  government,  61  n.;  duties 
of ,  65  n . ;  heads  party  faction ,  7 1 

Sabine,  L.,  Loyalists  of  the  Ameri- 
can Revolution,  cited,  124  n. 
See  also  Bibliography 

St.  Ange,  36,  38,  50  n.;  French 
commandant  at  Vincennes,  35: 
letters  from,  to  d'Abbadie,  36 
n.,  55  n.;  refuses  to  aid  Pontiac, 
37,  41;  surrenders  Fort  de 
Chartres,  45;  retires  to  St. 
Louis,  49;  commandant  at  St. 
Louis,  53  n. 

St.  Anne,  parish  of,  II 

St.  Genevieve,  87 n.;  French  from 
Illinois  found  homes  at,  33 

St.  Joseph,  3,  ii,  27 

St.  Lawrence  River,  3,  92 

St.  Louis,  45,  49;  French  from 
Illinois  found  homes  at,  53;  St. 
Ange  acts  as  commandant  of, 
53  n.;  foundation  of,  87;  furs 
transferred  from  Illinois  to,  90 

St.  Philippe,  7,  10,  n,  49 

St.  Vincent.      See  Vincennes 

Sandusky,  occupation  of,  27 

Sato,  S.,  History  of  the  Land 
Question  in  the  United  States, 
109  n.  See  also  Bibliography 

Saucier,  family  of,  9 

Scioto  River,  41,  73  n. 

Scrivener  of  the  marine.  See 
French  officials 

Seminary  of  Foreign  Missions,  5 
n.,  ii 

Seneca  Indians.  See  Indians, 
Seneca 


INDEX 


221 


Seven  Years'  War,  I,  4,  7 

Shawnee  Indians.  See  Indians, 
Shawnee 

Shea,  John  G.,Li/e  of  Archbishop 
Carroll,  cited,  n  n.,  75  n.,  76 
n.  See  also  Bibliography 

Shelburne,  Lord,  91,  136,  140  n.; 
opinions  of,  concerning  dispo- 
sition of  the  West,  15-16,  78 
n.,  95  n.;  letters  to,  from  Gage, 
23  n.,  55  n.,  62  n.,  64  n.,  86 
n.,  87  n.,  89  n.,  90  n.,  91  n., 
92  n.,  95  n.,  97  n.,  98  n.,  127 
n.;  from  Johnson,  55  n.,  58  n., 
59  n.,  6l  n.,  85  n.;  letters 
from,  to  Gage,  no  n.,  125  n., 
126  n.,  131  n.;  to  Lords  of 
Trade,  127  n.,  129  n.,  137  n.; 
general  attitude  of,  towards 
western  colonies,  no,  123  n., 
124,  125,  126-127,  129-131, 
132,  137;  becomes  secretary  of 
state  for  southern  department, 
123;  retires  from  ministry,  133- 

134 

Shuckburgh,  Richard,  letter  from, 
to  Johnson,  41  n. 

Sinnott,  sent  to  Illinois,  40  n. 

Sioussat,  St.  George  L.,  English 
Statutes  in  Maryland,  cited, 
25  n.  See  also  Bibliography 

Six  Nations,  29,  59 

Smith,  Adam,  136 

Smith,  William,  Historical  Ac- 
count of  the  Expedition  against 
the  Ohio  Indians,  cited,  119  n. 
See  also  Bibliography 

Sowers,  Capt.,  letter  from,  to 
Gage,  155  n. 

Spain,  18  n.,  41,  88,  98  n.,  71, 
126;  brought  to  terms  by  Eng- 
land, 4;  Louisiana  ceded  to, 
5;  furs  sent  to,  90;  proposed 
conquest  of  Louisiana  from, 
loo-ioi,  141-144;  disputes 
with  England  over  Falkland 
Islands,  143 

Spanish  traders.     See  Traders 

Sparks  Manuscripts  i  Harvard  Col- 
lege Library),  cited,  21  n.,  39 


n.,  86  n.,  i3On.,  148 n.,  1540., 
156  n.  See  also  Bibliography 
Stamp  Act,  57,  81,  102,  113,  133 
Sterling,  Capt.  Thomas,  50  n.,  52 
n-»  53»  56;  takes  command  of 
Fort  de  Chartres,  44-45;  letters 
from,  to  Gage,  44  n.,  45  n.,  48 
n.,  49  n.,  50  n.,  51  n.,  52  n., 
53  n.,  56  n.,  75  n. ;  announces 
Gage's  proclamation  to  inhabi- 
tants of  Illinois,  46-48;  petition 
to,  from  inhabitants  of  Illinois, 
48;  efforts  of,  to  bring  about 
order  in  Illinois,  49-50,  64; 
embarrassed  by  lack  of  supplies, 
51—52;  returns  to  New  York, 

54 
Stone,  William  L.,  Life  of  Sir 

William  Johnson,  II,  cited,  45 

n.     See  also  Bibliography 
Stuart,  Charles,  40  n. 
Sulpitian  fathers,  n,  75 
Superintendent  of  Indian  affairs. 

See  Indian  affairs 
Superior  Council  at  New  Orleans, 

5° 
Switzerland,  no 

Syndic.     See  French  officials 

Taylor,  Brig.,  letters  to,  from. 
Gage,  98  n.,  99  n.,  102  n.,  143 
n.;  letter  from,  to  Gage,  99  n. 

Tennessee,  state-of,  106 

Tennessee  River,  144  n. 

Terrage,  Marc  de  Villiers  du.  Lef 
dernier es  Annees  de  la  Louisi- 
ane  franfaise,  cited,  32  n.,  33 
n.,  38  n.,  41  n.  See  also  Bib- 
liography 

Thornton,  Presly,  105 

Thurlow,  Att.-Gen.,  25  n. 

Thwaites,  R.  G.,  Early  Western 
Travels,  I,  cited,  36  n.,  37  n., 
38  n.,  40  n.,  42  n.,  43  n.,  65 
n.,  66  n.,  68  n.;  "Early  Lead- 
mining  in  Illinois  and  Mich- 
igan", cited,  120  n.  See  also 
Bibliography 

Tonica  Indians.  See  Indians, 
Tonica 


222 


INDEX 


Townshend,  Charles,  133 

Township  system,  recommended 
for  proposed  Illinois  colony, 
119 

Trade,  8,  II,  87,  130,  132, 
I34»  J35.  I42.  J53  n-?  French 
monopoly  of,  threatened,  3; 
comparison  of  French  and  Eng- 
lish methods  of  managing,  28, 
78,  84-86;  attempts  to  regu- 
late, 55,  77,  79,  80  81,  89,  93, 
98-100,  131;  rivalry  between 
France  and  England  for  pre- 
dominance in,  77,  84;  condi- 
tions of,  in  Illinois  country, 
1765-1775,  77-102;  rush  of 
English  to  participate  in  western, 
82;  French  attempt  to  monopo- 
lize, 88;  benefit  of,  to  Great 
Britain,  94-96;  contraband, 
86  n.,  97  n.,  126  n.;  man- 
agement of,  transferred  to  col- 
onies, 102,  138;  effect  on, 
through  establishment  of  col- 
ony in  Illinois,  118,  125 

Traders,  British,  21  n.;  regula- 
tions for,  1 6,  80-8 1,  93,  96- 
97;  behavior  of,  19;  character 
of,  28;  methods  employed  by, 
32,  61,  85-86;  rush  to  Illinois 
country,  82;  rivalry  among, 
83-84;  fear  to  enter  Indian 
country,  87-88;  route  followed 
"by,  90—95;  Spanish,  23,  61, 
64  n.;  French,  necessity  of  re- 
pelling invasion  of,  23;  methods 
employed  by,  28,  30,  35,  40, 
41,  61,  64  n.,  85;  take  oath 
of  allegiance  to  English  crown, 
41;  route  followed  by,  82,  87; 
rivalry  of,  with  British,  83-84; 
purchase  goods  from  British,  86 

Transactions  of  the  Illinois  State 
Historical  Society  for  1907, 
cited,  45  n. 

Trottier,  Francois,  9 

Ulloa,  Gov.,  93 
United  States,  95  n. 


Vandalia  Company,  144 

Vandalia  grant,  137,  140 

Van  Schaack,  Henry  C.,  "Cap- 
tain Thomas  Morris  in  the  Illi- 
nois Country",  cited,  36  n. 
See  also  Bibliography 

Villiers,  Neyon  de,  gives  up  com- 
mand of  Fort  de  Chartres,  35- 
36 

Vincennes  (Post  Vincennes,  Post 
Vincent,  St.  Vincent),  3,  6  n., 

35,  40  n.,  42,  87  n.,  98  n. 
Viollet,  P.,  Hisloire  du  droit  fran- 

fais,  10  n.  See  also  Bibliog- 
raphy 

Virginia,  98  n.,  105,  118,  157  n.; 
settlers  from,  in  Ohio  Valley,  3; 
party  from,  attacked  by  In- 
dians, 63  n.;  establishes  Au- 
gusta County,  103;  residents 
of,  in  Mississippi  Land  Com- 
pany, 105,  109  n. 

Visitation,  chapel  of,  n 

Viviat,  Louis,  9,  69,  147  n.,  160 

Volney,  C.  F.,  Viewoftke  United 
States,  cited,  8  n.  See  also  Bib- 
liography 

Wabash    Land    Company,     160, 

161  n. 
Wabash   River,  3,  6  n.,  22,  35, 

36,  42,  44,  60,  61,  63  n.,  87, 
93,  98  n.,  105,  106,  no 

Wabash  settlements,  47 

Wallace,  Lieut.  Hugh,  letters  to, 
from  Johnson,  44  n. 

Wallace,  J.,  Illinois  and  Louisi- 
ana under  French  Rule,  cited, 
40  n.,  58  n.,  66  n.,  70  n.  See 
also  Bibliography 

Walpole,  Thomas,  140  n. 

Walpole  Company.  140,  144.  See 
also  Vandalia  Company 

Walton,  F.  P.,  The  Scope  and  In- 
terpretation of  the  Civil  Code 
of  Lower  Canada,  cited,  25  n. 
See  also  Bibliography 

Washington,  George,  105,  144 
n.;  letter  from,  to  Crawford, 
108  n. 


INDEX 


•223 


Washington,  George,  Writings 
of  (ed. Ford),  cited,  108  n.,  127 
n.,  144  n. 

Washington,  John,  105 
Washington,  Samuel,  105 
West,  the,  58,  77,  79,  84,  86,  87, 
94,    108  n.,  113,   119  n.,   121 
n.,123,  127  n.,  131,  135,  141, 
144  n.,  160  n.,  161;  treatment 
accorded,   13,  14;   Shelburne's 
plan    for,   15;    Gage   in    touch 
with,   18;   inability  of   govern- 
ment  to  control,  20;  no  pro- 
vision  for,  in    proclamation  of 
1763,  23;  extension  of  English 
law  to,  discussed,  24-25;  occu- 
pation   of   posts  in,    27;    Pon- 
tiac  determines  to  rehabilitate 
French  power  in,  29;  value  of, 
to  Great  Britain,  93  ff.;   Hills- 
borough's  statement  regarding, 
100;  propositions  for  establish- 
ment   of   colonies  in,   129  n.; 
opposition  to  establishment  of 
colonies  in,    139   n.,   144   n.; 
Haldimand   left   in  charge  of, 
149   n.;    condition    of    Indian 
affairs  in,  157  n. 
West,  Company  of  the,  6 
West  Florida.     See  Florida 
Wharton,  Joseph,  Jr.,  116  n. 
Wharton,  Joseph,  Sr.,  116  n. 
Wharton,  Samuel,  69  n.,  116  n. 
Wharton,  Thomas,  letter  from,  to 

B.  Franklin,  130  n. 
Wilkins,  Lieut. -Col.  John,  68  n., 
70  n.;    complaints  of,  against 


French  in  Illinois,  63  n.,  70; 
takes  command  at  Fort  de 
Chartres,  64;  letters  from,  to 
Gage,  64  n.,  96  n.,  98  n.,  155 
n. ,  156  n.;  to  Barrington,  67 
n.,  88  n.,  97  n.,  98  n.;  efforts 
of,  to  bring  about  order  in  Illi- 
nois, 65,  69;  discussion  as  to 
authority  of,  in  establishing 
court,  66—67;  proclamation  of, 
concerning  justices,  67  n.,  70 
n.;  heads  party  faction  in  Illi- 
nois, 71;  abolishes  court  of 
judicature,  71-72,  145;  con- 
fronted with  Indian  problem, 
73,  74;  relations  of,  with  Roman 
Catholics,  74;  effort  of,  to  regu- 
late trade,  96  n.;  letter  to, 
from  Gage,  155  n.;  dismissed 
from  Illinois  post,  155-156; 
goes  to  England,  157-158 

Williams,  David,  69 

Willing,  Thomas,  letter  from,  to 
Haldimand,  156  n. 

Winsor,  Justin,  Narrative  and 
Critical  History  of  America, 
cited,  6  n.,  7  n.,  II  n.,  27  n., 
31  n.,  32  n.,  38  n.,  42  n.;  Mis- 
sissippi Basin,  cited,  27  n.,  29 
n.,  31  n.,  32  n.,  33  n.,  35  n., 
38n.,42n.;  Westward  Move- 
ment, cited,  66  n.,  70  n.,  in 
n.,  127  n.,  134  n.,  136  n.  Set 
also  Bibliography 

Wisconsin  River,  88 

York,  Chancellor,  160 


